Lebanon ,  Pa . , 
United  Brethren  Church 


History  of  the 
Controversy  between 
East  Pennsylvania 
Conference 
and 
Trinity  U.  B.  Church 


■r:>^ 


'-it-m 


tihraxy  of  €he  Cheolo^icd  ^^mimvy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


'd^t- 


PRESENTED  BY 

RufuE  ii.    Leit'evre 


Ffc.^  A  J.   iabJ 


HISTORY 


-OF- 


The    Controversy 


■BETWEEN- 


£ast  ipennsjilvania  Conference 


-AND- 


Crlnltj?  ^»  IB.  Cburcb, 

LEBANON,  PA., 

WITH 

An  Appeal 

o  the  Clergy  and  Laity  on  the  Rights  of  the  Laity  In  the 
Church  of  the  United  Brethren  in  Christ. 


Authorized  and  published  by  the  official  board  of 

TRINITY   U.    B.    CHURCH,   LEBANON,  PA 


INTRODUCTORY. 


After  long  and  patient  waiting  for  the  Christian  spirit 
to  triumph  and  end  our  controversy  with  East  Pennsyl- 
vania Con'erence,  and  continuing  for  almost  two  yeara, 
and  with  little  hope,  at  present,  that  our  misguided 
brethren  will  abandon  their  worse  than  unseemly  course; 
We,  the  official  board  of  Trinity  U.  B.  Church,  I^ebanon, 
Pa  ,  now  think  it  proper  and  necessary  to  publish  to  the 
church  at  large  the  facts  connected  with  the  controversy 
so  needlessly  and  unwisely  begun,  expose  the  lawlessncM 
of  our  oppressors  and  reply  to  the  more  important  and 
deceiving  excuses,  not  reasons,  they  give  out  to  palliate 
and  justify  their  unprecedented,  inexcusable  and  destruc- 
tive procedure  with  our  congregation. 

This  pamphlet  needs  and  makes  no  apology  for  its  ap- 
pearance, but  that  of  sad  necessity.  It  needs  but  little  ex- 
planation. It  will  explain  itself  to  him  that  reads  it. 
After  almost  two  years  of  hard  dealing  with  us,  of  the  ifl' 
tensest  heart  suffering  for  our  erring  brethren  and  for  the 
church  we  built  and  have  supported  in  every  way  for  al- 
most thirty  years,  and  after  many  bitter  and  untrue  at- 
tacks upon  us,  and  after  two  compromises  proposed  by 
ourselves,  heartily  entered  into  by  all,  and  kept  by  our- 
selves and  broken  by  them,  we  have  not  written  a  line  of 
defense  or  explanation. 

Often  we  felt  we  could  endure  the  outrage  no  longer 
but  we  now  think  better  counsel  prevailed.  Many  have 
urged  us,  from  the  beginning,  to  tell  the  story  as  we 
know  it,  but  we  have  resisted  this  friendly  interest  until 
now.  We  did  not  remain  silent  because  we  were  guilty  of 
a  great  wrong  or  had  no  defense,  as  the  reader  will  easily 
see  before  he  finishes  reading  these  pages.  We  bore  all 
without  response  because  we  determined  not  to  be   re- 


sponsible  for  the  continuance  of  the  trouble  and  also  in 
the  hope  that  after  our  clerical  brethren  had  time  to  con- 
sider th -ir  great  blunder  and  cool  off  they  would  relent 
and  the  controversy  would  speedily  come  to  a  peaceful 
end.  Moreover  we  knew  the  cause  of  our  Master  would 
suffer  less  and  we  would  show  the  Christian  spirit  more  if 
we  "answered  not  a  word."  Nor  do  we  intend  now  to  go 
into  the  secular  papers  with  our  cause  or  make  more  than 
a  single  reference  to  anything  of  the  much  the  presiding 
elder  has  published  and  sent  out  through  the  columns  of 
the  Conference  Herald  and  the  little  published  by  Bishop 
Hott  in  the  daily  papers  of  our  city. 

Our  first  reason  for  breaking  our  long  and  patient  si- 
lence is  that  the  attitude  and  conduct  of  the  presiding 
elder  and  the  conference  toward  us  waxes  worse  and 
worse.  Their  course  has  gone  from  disregard  of  tacit  and 
and  positive  promises  to  us,  from  utterly  ignoring  every 
courteous,  reasonable  and  fairly  expressed  request  and 
petition  we  made  to  them,  and  from  their  arbitrary  rule, 
to  high  handed  lawlessness  and  relentless  oppression  that 
not  only  menaces  the  very  existence  of  our  congregation 
but  disgraces  the  whole  church  and  threatens  it  wdth  an- 
archical confusion,  present  inefficiency  and  future  decay. 
Along  with  this  there  are  an  increasingly  large  number  of 
valuable, influential  and  sympathizing  friends  from  many 
sections  in  the  church, and  out  of  it,  who  say  we  have  borne 
the  assaults  and  disregard  of  our  rights  long  enough,  and, 
with  earnest  solicitation, urge  us  to  tell  our  side  of  the  story, 
call  attention  to  their  own  various  lawless  acts,  and  let 
the  people,  acting  as  a  jurj^  determine  where  the  respon- 
sibility for  the  disgraceful  controversy  should  rest. 
Another  reason  for  publishing  this  pamphlet  is  that  we 
have  been  refused  a  hearing  through  the  columns  of  the 
Conference  Herald  and  the  Telescope. 

Dr.  Rock  wrote  to  D.  D.  Lowery,  the  presiding  elder, 
January  21st,  1895,  and  said: 

"My  Brother:— Through  the  columns  of  the  Conference 
Herald  you  have  made  two  attacks    upon    Trinity    and 


myself.     Will  you,  in  fairness,  allow  me  a  reply  through 
the  same  medium." 

To  this  he  made  no  reply  whatever. 

On  July   7th,   1896,  Dr    Rock  wrote  the  editor  of  the 
Telescope  the  following  letter: — 

Lebanon,  Pa.,  July  7,  1896. 
Editor  Telescope,  Dayton,  O. 

Dear  Bro: — It  appears  that 
the  Lebanon  Trinity  Church  controversy  has  become 
known  throughout  the  church  and  in  a  way  that,  to  the 
incor  ectly  informed,  leads  them  to  place  all  the  respon- 
sibility for  the  unfortunate  trouble  on  the  congregation 
and  myself  We  feel  so  assured  that  a  true,  clear  and 
unimpassioned  statement  of  the  facts  in  the  columns  of 
the  Telescope,  with  a  clean  and  manly  discussion  of  the 
questions  involved,  would  remove  censure  from  us  and 
place  it  where  it  belongs,  and  do  so  great  good  for  our 
Zion  that  on  behalf  of  the  congregation  and  myself  I 
write  to  kindly  ask  you  for  the  privilege  of  such  state- 
ment and  discussion.  We  are  futhermore  led  to  such  rea- 
sonable and  courteous  request  because  the  Telescope,  in 
publishing  its  own  opinions  and  the  movements  of  our 
oppressors  and  the  counsels  and  decisions  of  the  board  of 
bishops,  relative  to  the  matter,  has  been  the  chief  medi- 
um of  information  to  the  whole  church  concerning  the 
controversy.  It  is  the  only  existing  medium  through 
which  the  entire  church  can  be  informed  of  the  truth  and 
the  facts  and  by  which  all  fair  minds  will  relieve  us  from 
more  than  a  fraction  of  censure  for  all  the  unpleasant 
things  that  have  occurred  and  for  the  gross  and  outrage- 
ous wrongs  that  have  been  perpetrated.  With  the  hope 
that  you  will  prove  the  friend  of  fair  play  and  of  the 
wronged  and  oppressed,  and  with  the  one  desire  of  secur- 
ing justice  to  ourselves  and  greater  justice  to  our  Mas- 
ter's cause,  I  am 

■Vours  Faithfully, 

R.  ROCK. 

To  this  letter  the  editor  of  the  Telescope  made  the  fol- 
lowing reply: 

Daytox,  O.,  July  9th,  1896. 
Rev.  R.  Rock,  D.  D. 

Dear  Brother: — Replying  to  yours 
of  the  7th  inst.,  I  would  say  that  the  columns  of  the 
Telescope  cannot  be  thiowa  upcii  to  a  ui.^cusaiou  of  the 
merits  and  demerits  of  the  case  to  which  you  refer.  To  do 


so. -would  be  to  inflict  great  injury  upon  the  whole  church, 
•nd  could  result  in  no  good  whatever.  Of  cours:^  official 
statements  in  regard  to  the  matter, coming  from  the  quar- 
terly and  the  annual  conference,  or  from  the  presiding 
elder  or  the  board  of  bishops,  will  be  published  when  ac- 
companied by  a  request  to  that  effect, but  nothing  more." 

Just  what  is  meant  by  "official  statements"  we  cannot 
tell  but  it  will  be  observed  that  ha  shuts  out  "the  merits 
and  demerits  of  the  case."  We  made  the  request  think- 
ing the  Telescope  belongs  to  the  laity  of  the  church 
just  as  much  as  to  the  clerical  officials,  and  with  the  un- 
derstanding that  when  an  exposure  or  attack  is  made  on 
any  person  or  persons  they  have  the  right  of  defense 
through  the  same  medium. 

But  it  will  appear  evident  to  all  that  either  we  must  re- 
main under  the  censure  of  having  no  justification  for  our 
course,  and  the  non-informed  and  misinformed  must  re- 
main ignorant  of  the  facts,  and  the  guilty  go  free  of  the 
censure  and  condemnation  they  deserve,  or  we  must  pub- 
lish the  facts  through  the  most  respectable  medium  open 
to  us. 

In  telling  the  story  we  will  indulge  in  no  coloring  nor 
use  any  of  the  arts  of  rhetoric.  Nor  will  we  aim  to  use 
Ihe  "rubbing  in"  process  on  our  enemies  and  oppressors, 
although  they  have  often  made  themselves  vulaerable. 
A  clear,  unimpassioned  statement  and  the  unvarnished 
truth  will  be  severer  than  we  could  wish,  but  this  we  can 
not  avoid.  The  best  we  can  do  is  to  state  the  truth  in 
kind,  soft  words.  While  we  will  not  pose  as  perfect, 
their  mistakes  will  be  set  down  as  well  as  our  own  and 
this  to  show  that  there  are  abundant  mitigating  circum- 
atances  to  justify  our  course.  Nor  do  we  publish  the  facts 
because  of  any  ill  will  to  our  brethren  who  have  so  cruelly 
and  unfeelingly  wronged  us  or  with  any  desire  to  do  them 
harm.  We  love  them,  but  do  not  love  their  conduct,  and 
atand  ready  any  time  to  meet  them  and  end  the  contro- 
versy with  a  love  feast  when  they  do  works  meet  for  re- 
pehtance,  and  are  willing  to  respect  our  tastes,  our  choices 
and  our  rights.  ^ 


We  will  first  invite  the  attention  of  our  readers  to  the 

MITIGATING  CIRCUMSTANCES. 

In  many  controversies,  even  where  there  is  no  authority 
for  the  course  pursued  by  either  or  both  parties  involved, 
there  are  one  or  more  mitigating  or  palliating  circum- 
st  inces,  that  is  facts  which  either  explain  the  conduct  or 
lessen  or  remove  the  guilt  of  the  offender  or  do  both. 
Leaving  out  of  the  question  at  this  place  any  discussion 
as  to  the  loyalty  or  lawlessness  of  Trinity  church  in  re- 
jecting Rev.  /.  A.  Weidlerand  employing  Rev  Dr.  Rock 
we  invite  the  unprejudiced  and  impartial  attention  of  the 
church  to  a  number  of  facts,  put  down  in  the  order  of 
their  occurrence,  which  explain  our  course  and  we  believe 
will  be  sufficient  to  justify  us  and  to  place  the  responsi- 
bility for  all  our  trouble  upon  the  conference  or  those 
who  acted  for  it.  We  do  not  say  we  acted  infallibly  in  all 
we  did,  but  we  ask  our  brethren  who  believe  in  fairness 
and  the  practice  of  good  faith  among  men,  and  also  in 
the  right  of  the  laity  to  a  vo'ce  in  the  selection  of  a  suit- 
able pastor,  and  the  rejection  of  one  disqualified,  for  any 
reason, to  serve  them  with  efficiency, to  determine, from  the 
following  facts. whether  we  were  not  tempted  by  an  extra- 
ordinary provocation. 

r.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  conference  year  of  189^,  it 
became  known  to  us  and  our  pastor,  Rev.  C  J  Kephart, 
that  he  would  retire,  two  months  later,  from  the  pastorate 
of  our  congregation.  There  was  some  talk  about  a  suit- 
able preacher  to  be  his  successor  and  he  kindly  suggested 
the  name  of  Dr  Rock,  as  probibly  an  available  man. 
This  was  the  first  and  only  suggestion  of  the  name  of  Dr. 
Rock,  from  any  source,  and  to  this  we  gave  but  little 
thought  until  after  hearing  him  at  Mt.  Gretna  camp- 
meeting,  and  still  more  at  the  last  quarterly  conference 
for  that  year 

2,  Not  a  few  times,  in  our  homes,  on  the  street  cars 
and  elsewhere,  our  presiding  elder,  Rev.  D.  D.  Lowery, 
iindly,  ^.^d.  yfc  thought  with  sincerity,  asked  us  who  we 


wanted  for  our  next  pastor.  To  his  inquiry  we  never  ir?- 
dicated  a  name.  Then  in  our  last  quarterly  conference 
for  that  year,  and  held  on  the  evening  of  September  4th, 
1894,  and  after  the  regular  business  was  finished,  and  in, 
accordance  with  our  custom  and  a  very  common  practice 
throughout  the  church, Rev.  I/Owery  asked  us  whether  we 
desired  to  take  any  action  as  to  who  should  be  our  next 
pastor.  The  reader  will  observe  that  the  presiding  elder 
brought  the  matter  up  himself  and  virtually  invited  us  to 
make  a  selection  and  shoulder  the  responsibility.  Our 
reply  was  that  we  thought  of  making  no  selection.  As 
times  were  close  and  we  were  in  debt  we  wauld  accept  an 
appointment  from  the  conference  and  very  much  reduce 
the  salary.  Against  this  idea  of  reducing  the  salary  the 
presiding  elder  and  our  pastor  protested  earnestly,  with 
good  reasons.  Then  one  of  our  oflBcials  said,  "If  we  must 
pay  the  old  salary  we  intend  to  have  good  preaching  and 
want  some  say  about  who  shall  do  it."  No  one  raised  any 
objection  to  that  and,  acting  on  the  earlier  suggestion  of 
our  pastor,  he  proceeded  to  move  that  we  call  Dr.  Rock. 
The  presiding  elder  refused  to  entertain  thio  motion,  say- 
ing, calls  were  not  legal  in  our  church.  This  is  doubtful 
according  to  discipline,  page  80,  section  5. 

Then  the  question  was  asked,  "What  will  you  enter- 
tain?" He  replied,  "I  will  entertain  a  motion  requesting 
the  conference  to  send  you  Dr.  Rock."  A  motion  request- 
ing the  conference  to  send  us  Dr,  Rock  was  immediately 
made  and  carried  without  a  dissenting  vote.  Besides  all 
this,  we  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  we  did  not  ignore 
and  treat  discourteously,  either  the  presiding  elder  or  the 
conference,  but  courteously  requested  them  to  send  us 
Dr.  Rock.  It  has  been  our  custom  to  make  our  own  se- 
lection of  a  pastor  and  we  were  never  denied  our  choice 
before,  and  would  not  have  been  at  that  time  with  a  pre- 
siding elder  and  bishop  of  less  egotism  and  more  judg- 
ment. 

3.  After  adjournment  of  the  qusulerly  conference  and 
on   the  way  home   that  night,  one  of  our  officials  asked 


Rev.  Lowery  if  he  would  notify  Dr.  Rock  of  our  action. 
He  kindly  replied,  "You  notify  him."  In  that  same 
quarterly  conference  he  said,  "You  have  asked  for  Dr. 
Rock  and  you  shall  have  him,"  and  in  a  letter  to  one  of 
our  brethren,  and  which  we  have,  he  said,  "I  do  not  sup 
pose  that  there  is,  in  our  conference,  any  man  weak- 
minded  enough  to  want  to  go  where  he  is  not  wanted.  So 
that  difficulty,  I  should  think,  would  be  settled."  Bit 
two  such  men  have  been  found  in  the  conference,  men 
who  not  only  wanted  to  come  but  appealed  to  force  to  be 
our  pastor. 

4,  Dr.  Rock  was  then  notified  of  the  action  of  our 
quarterly  conference  and  the  desire  of  our  people,  and 
upon  receiving  the  notice  he  asked  for  a  transfer  from  his 
conference,  expecting  to  place  it  with  East  Pennsylvania 
Conference,  and  also  declined  work  from  his  conference. 
As  East  Pennsylvania  Conference  did  not  convene  until  a 
month  later,  he  was  idle  dining  that  time  awaiting  ap- 
pointment here  and  also  lost  |roo  salary,  that  being  the 
amount  per  month  he  was  receiving  at  Summit  street 
church,  Dayton,  O.  By  the  time  too,  that  the  East  Penn- 
sylvania Conference  convened,  the  fall  conferences  were 
all  over  and  he  would  have  been  obliged  to  go  out  of  the 
church  to  get  pastoral  employment. 

5.  During  this  month  of  waiting  Dr.  Rock  wrote  to 
D.  D  Lowery  concerning  the  matter.  Not  dreaming  of 
any  trouble,  or  a  misuse  of  his  letter,  he  kept  no  copy. 
After  Rev.  Lowery  garbled  portions  of  it  and  published 
them  in  the  Conference  Herald,  Dr.  Rock  wrote  him, 
kindly  asking  for  a  copy  of  the  letter,  and  he  did  not 
even  reply .  Dr.  Rock  authorizes  us  to  challenge  him  to 
publish  the  letter  in  full  in  the  Conference  Herald  or  in 
the  Telescope,  or  both.  As  nearly  as  Dr.  Rock  can  re- 
member, the  substance  of  the  letter  was  as  follows: 

Dayton,  O  ,  Sept.  15,   (about)  1894. 
Rev.   D.  D.  Lowry,  Harrisburg,  Pa. 

Dear  Bro: — I  have  an  in- 
vitation to  become  the   pastor   of  Tnnity,  Lebanon,  and 


8 

am  glad  you  have  given  your  approval.  '  In  lieu]  of  this 
I  have  taken  a  transfer  from  my  conference  and  if  you 
think  the  wa}^  is  clear  I  will  send  you  my  transfer  and 
become  one  of  your  number  and  go  to  work  to  build  up 
the  kingdom  of  the  Master  as  represented  by  your  con- 
ference. It  would  be  a  calamity  to  myself  and  family  if 
the  appointment  should  not  be  made.   What  shall  I  do?" 

This  is  not  all  of  the  letter  but  such  portion  as  bears 
more  directly  on  the  matter  before  us.  The  whole  letter 
is  an  open,  frank  expression  to  the  presiding  elder  and 
as  absolutely  free  from  any  scheming  or  deceit  as  can  be. 
We  desire  the  reader  to  mark  the  statement,  "If  you 
think  the  way  is  clear,"  and  the  question,  "What  shall 
I  do?" 

In  a  little  more  than  two  weeks  from  the  date  of  Dr. 
Rock's  letter  and  on  Monday  of  the  week  in  which  East 
Penna.  Conference  convened  on  Wednesday,  he  received 
from  Rev.  Lowery  the  following  postal  card : 

"My  Dear  Bro.  Rock:  Just  received  your  letter  this  mo- 
ment. Sorry  it  was  not  forwarded  to  me.  It  will  be  "all 
right"  so  far  as  I  am  concerned.  But,  you  know,  my 
opinion  cannot  be  final.  Conference  may  instrnct  other- 
wise. The  Miami  conference  affair  last  year  has  encour- 
aged that  kind  of  disposition  on  the  part  of  some  of  our- 
brethren.  I  am  anticipating  no  difficulty,  however. 
Yours  Fraternally, 

D.  D.  LOWERY, 
10-1-94.  Harrisburg,  Pa." 

In  the  Conference  Herald  for  December,  1894,  Rev. 
Lowery  undertakes  to  explain  away  the  evident  meaning 
of  tne  word  "anticipate"  as  used  in  his  card  saying: 

"I  was  particularly  concerned  about  the  wording  of 
this  sentence,  and  did  not  mean  to  say  that  I  expect  no 
difficult}',  for  I  was  very  uncertain  as  to  the  issue  of  this 
question  at  conference,  and  so  I  used  the  word  "antici- 
pate" in  the  sense  of  "to  take  up  beforehand  or  before 
the  proper  time,"  to  "pre-occupy,"  "forestall." 

Bro.  Lowerv  scarcely  has  the  reputation  of  having  such 


superfine  taste  for  words  or  of  being  such  a  linguistic 
metaphysician  as  to  use  a  word  with  such  very  fine  dis- 
crimination. He  gave  as  his  reason  for  not  writing  a 
letter  instead  of  a  card  that  he  had  no  stamp,  and  yet  he 
has  all  that  free  delivery  signifies.  But  Dr.  Rock  took 
the  card  to  be  a  frank  and  altogether  friendly  reply  and 
to  mean  just  what  it  says,  and  acted  accordingly.  Had  he 
dreamed  trouble  was  brewing  he  would  have  attended 
the  East  Pennsylvania  Conference  session  in  person  and 
have  placed  his  transfer  with  the  conference.  But  think- 
ing, from  Bro.  Lowery's  card,  that  all  would  be  well,  he 
concluded  to  commit  all  to  him  and  save  the  heavy  ex- 
pense of  the  trip,  since  Bro.  Lowery  "anticipated  no  diffi 
culty."  If  he  knew  trouble  was  brewing  why  did  he  not, 
with  honesty  and  brotherly  frankness,  say  so  to  Dr.  Rock 
and  suggest  to  him  that  he  come  and  look  after  his  own 
interests.  This  would  have  made  an  honest  impression. 
Instead  of  this  he  declares  that  he  used  the  word  "antici- 
pate" in  the  sense  in  which  it  is  only  seldom  used  and  in 
a  sense  differing  from  what  Dr.  Rock  was  likely  to  un- 
derstand. If  he  had  been  as  brave  and  honest  as  he  is 
stubborn  and  bigoted  he  would  have  been  frank  with  Dr. 
Rock.  He  evidently  meant  what  any  man  would  think 
he  meant  after  reading  the  card, although  we  have  a  letter 
from  him,  written  to  one  of  our  brethren  before  this,  in 
which,  it  plainly  appears,  that  himself  and  others  were 
planning  to  defeat  Dr.  Rock's  appointment  to  Trinity. 
Although  Rev.  Ivowery  said  to  Dr.  Rock  that  a  certain 
bishop  had  said  the  card  was  against  Dr.  Rock,  that  same 
bishop  said  to  Dr.  Rock  that  he  had  a  right  to  think  every- 
thing all  right  from  what  was  in  the  card, and  not  a  person 
to  whom  the  card  has  been  shpwn,  and  it  has  been  shown 
to  many, places  any  other  interpretation  upon  it.  All  say 
he  had  a  right  to  think  everything  all  right  with  the  pre- 
siding elder  and  to  expect  the  appointment. 

6.  Notwithstanding  Bishop  Hott  told  us  we  were  un- 
der no  legal  obligations  to  pay  Dr.  Rock,  we  did  not  be- 
lieve it,  but   felt  ourselves  under  both   moral  and  legal 


lO 

obligations  to  him  for  his  full  salary,  since  through  onr 
giving  him  notice  of  ovir  action  and  requesting  him  to  be- 
come our  pastor,  he  was  without  remunerative  employ- 
ment with  which  to  support  his  family.  And  we  we;it  so 
far  as  to  invite  Dr.  Rock  to  become  our  pastor  because  it 
had  been  our  custom,  from  the  beginning,  to  select  our 
pastor,  excepting  an  instance  or  two,  and  the  conference 
had  always  kindly  granted  us  our  choice.  We  secured 
our  former  pastor  without  the  assistance  of  the  confer- 
ence or  presiding  elder  and  we  never  knew  any  one  to 
make  any  ado  about  it. 

7.  During  this  same  month  of  waiting  and  only  one 
week  before  the  convening  of  East  Penna.  Conference, 
and  while  Bishop  Hott  was  in  our  city  holding  Bast  Ger- 
man Conference,  two  of  our  officials  called  on  him  at 
Rev.  H.  S.  Gabel's,  where  he  had  his  home,  to  have  a 
talk  with  him  concerning  our  action  and  to  urge  the  ap- 
pointment of  Dr.  Rock.  He  then  knew  of  nothing  in  the 
way  and  spoke  in  complimentary  terms  of  Dr.  Rock  as  a 
preacher  but  then,  and  later,  in  a  letter,  spoke  disparag- 
ingly of  him  as  a  pastor.  When  they  said,  "If  you  think 
anything  more  is  necessary  to  secure  the  appointment  we 
can  send  a  petition  to  conference  signed  by  at  least  five 
sixths  of  our  congregation,"  he  replied,  "It  is  not  neces- 
sary .  All  you  need  do  is  to  send  a  certified  copy  of  your 
quarterly  conference  action."  To  the  question, "To  whom 
shall  we  send  it?"  he  replied,  "To  me."  Dr.  Rock  was 
put  in  possession  of  these  kindly  dispositions  of  the  bishop 
and  these,  with  what  we  have  set  down  before,  led  him 
to  confide  in  the  authorities  and  commit  all  to  them. 

8.  On  the  floor  of  that  memorable  conference  where 
those  tacit  and  positive  promises  were  broken,  our  lay 
delegate,  duly  authorized  to  do  so,  warned  the  conference 
that  if  Dr.  Rock  was  not  appointed  there  would  be 
trouble.  What  has  followed  is  more  than  a  sufficient  re- 
ply to  the  question,  "Was  he  right  ?" 

9 .  In  the  face  of  these  facts  and  to  say  the  least,  taci  t 
promises  of  the  bishop  and  presiding   elder,  they  sent  us 


11 

Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler,  a  man  that  could  not,  under  any  «i-r- 
cumstances,  and  especially  under  the  sensitive  and  pe- 
culiar conditions  that  had  been  created  by  their  arbitrary 
procedure,  have  served  us  advantageously  in  any  particu- 
lar. We  had  heard  of  failures  at  Baltimore  and  Phila- 
delphia and  did  not  know  of  signal  success  anywhere,  al- 
though Bishop  Hott,  in  an  effort  to  persuade  us  to  drop 
Dr.  Rock  and  accept  Rev.  Weidler,  wrote  to  A.  S.  Light, 
editor  of  the  Courier,  and  postmaster  of  this  city, 
saying,  "  There  were  elements  in  the  case  deeper 
really  than  you  apprehended,  in  the  minds  of  the  breth- 
ren of  the  confei^nce.  You  heard  the  speeches  on  the 
conference  floor  and  saw  the  vote,  and  of  course  you  will 
know  that  with  the  case  as  it  rested,  in  the  minds  of  the 
conference,  to  have  appointed  Dr.  Rock  to  Trinity  church 
would  have  been  to  create  a  breach  in  the  conference 
which  I  am  sure,  from  what  I  saw  of  your  spirit,  you  and 
your  church  would  not  wish  to  have  created.  Better  to 
endure  something  else.  It  gives  me  great  pain  of  heart 
that  I  could  not  see  my  way  clear  under  these  circum- 
stances, to  comply  with  your  request.  Of  course  I  do  not 
think  you  or  3'our  people  could,  under  these  conditions, 
have  expected  any  other  course  from  the  committee.*  My 
only  interest  is  to  serve  the  cause  of  the  Master  and  the 
churches  and  though  you  have  not  asked  a  word  of 
counsel  from  myself,  I  have  known  the  parties 
in  this  matter  for  many  years.  I  venture  to  say  to 
you  that  your  church  is  well  supplied.  Bro.  Weidler  is 
an  able  man,  a  fine  scholar,  a  tireless  studeat  and  worker, 
and  a  man  of  unblemished  life  and  devotion  to  the  cause 
of  the  Master,  and  has  a  good  record.  He  is  such  a  man 
as  you  may  well  be  proud  of,  and  he  will  keep  you  in 
good  shape  and  do  you  good  service,  and  honor  the 
cause  we  all  love.  I  do  not  wish  to  reflect  on  the  one  you 
have  thought  of,  for  I  have  no  occasion ^to  do  so,  but  in 
all  candor  I  must  say  to  you  that  if  you  knew  all  in  this 
matter  you  would  feel  that  you  are  fortunate  personally 
and  as  a  church.     Now  I  know  what  I  sav,  vou  are  be#ter 


supplied  as  you  are — very  much  better.'"  We  call  especial 
attention  to  the  mystery  he  indicates  in  the  "deeper  ele- 
ments in  the  case,"  and  to  the  insinuating  and  cowardly 
way  in  which  he  reflects  upon  Dr.  Rock,  as  if  something 
awful  might  be  wrong  with  his  record  as  a  man  and  as  a 
pastor.  Of  course  everybod}'  who  knows  the  facts  will 
smile  at  his  pettifogging  when  he  speaks  so  superlatively 
of  Rev.  Weidler's  scholarship,  ability  and  success,  and 
they  will  laugh  more  at  the  saying  that  we  would  be 
"very  much  better"  served  by  Rev.  Weidler  than  by  Dr. 
Rock.  One  word,  right  here,  as  to  Dr.  Rock's  efficiency. 
We  have  never  been  served  better  in  the  pulpit  and  rarely 
so  well  in  our  homes.  He  is  equally  strong  as  a  preach- 
er and  a  pastor.  We  had  heard  well  of  him,  but  he  has 
far  superseded  our  expectations.  We  are  so  delighted 
with  him,  that  we  could  have  no  greater  pleasure,  than 
to  have  him  appointed  our  pastor  at  once. 

During  the  first  half  of  this  year  Mr.  Rigor,  who  poses 
now  as  our  pastor,  after  he  voted,  with  the  conference,  at 
the  special  session,  to  end  his  pastorate,  to  annul  our  con- 
tract with  him,  and  accepted  an  appointment  to  "a  new 
society"  which  he  should  organize,  but  never  will,  be- 
cause he  can't,  was  in  the  habit  of  saying  that  "Weidler 
should  have  resigned  at  once,  that  the  conference  should 
never  have  sent  him,"  and  gave  as  a  reason  that  "he  has 
destroyed  several  churches."  Moreover  our  former 
pastor  must  have  thought  the  conditions  here  suggested 
our  going  abroad  for  a  pastor,  or  he  would  not  have  men- 
tioned the  name  of  Dr.  Rock  as  a  man  that  would  pro- 
bably suit  us. 

lo.  Upon  our  giving  Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler  information 
that  we  would  not  receive  him,  he  requested  a  special  ses- 
sion of  quarterly  conference,  to  counsel  on  the  situation. 
The  presiding  elder  called  the  conference  and  in  it  the 
plea  was  made  to  receive  him  but  we  told  him  we  were 
under  obligations  to  Dr.  Rock,  that  the  stationing  com- 
mittee had  broken  faith  with  us,  that  we  had  been  dealt 
with  arbitrarily  and  that  therefore,  if  he  even  suited  us, 


^-3 

nve  could  not  and  would  not  receive  and  support  him. 
Nor  did  we  think  ourselves  lawless  in  doing  this,  for  we 
believed  then  and  believe  now  that,  when  our  law  is 
^properly  , interpreted,  it  guarantees  to  the  laity  an  imme- 
diate voice  in  the  selection  of  a  pastor  and  the  right  of 
redress  from  plainly  unwise  and  arbitrary  appointments. 
If  it  does  not,  then  all  this  talk  about  the  freedom  o'f  our 
polity  from  episcopacy-,  about  tbe  right  of  appeal  being 
inviolate,  and  about  Congregationalism  in  our  polity,  is 
so  much  twaddle".  The  ditference  between  Congrega- 
tionalism, as  those  who  have  the  itinerant  system  use  the 
term,  and  an  absolute  itineracy, is  the  difference  between 
the  calling  of  a  pastor  by  the  congregation  and  the  ap- 
pointing of  one  by  a  constituted  authority  in  which  the 
•congregation  has  no  immediate  voice  at  all. 

All  can  see,  too,  that  the  appointment  of  Rev.  Weidler 
■was  a  challenge.  Officially,  we  had  given  notice  that  it 
Dr.  Rock  was  not  appointed  there  would  be  trouble. 
They  did  not  believe  us  and  so  challenged  us  to  make 
good  our  warning. 

II.  Notwithstanding  Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler  refused  to  re- 
sign, we  renewed  our  call  to  Dr.  Rock  and  employed  him 
for  the  year,  every  member  of  our  official  board  signing 
the  contract.  Having  in  regular  quarterly  conference>, 
rejected  Rev.  Weidler,  we  verily  believed  that  we  had  a 
disciplinary  right  to  employ  the  man  we  desired  to  serve 
us.  We  knew  of  nothing  in  the  way  bat  the  arbitrary 
refusal  of  the  presiding  elder  to  appoint  Dr.  Rock,  and 
that  was  an  obstruction  easily  overcome.  The  only  thing 
that  cast  any  doubt  on  our  belief,  but  did  not  change  our 
opinion, was  the  decision  of  the  Board  of  Bishops  making 
a  preacher  a  pastor  and  giving  him  control  of  a  church 
as  soon  as  appointed  to  it  by  the  stationing  committee 
and  leaving  the  congregation  without  any  appeal  or  re^ 
dress.  In  lieu  of  their  decision,  however,  we  heartily 
fell  in  line  with  their  recommendation  to  arbitrate  the 
case,  but  Rev.  Weidler  refused  to  consider  it. 

Some  persons  have  thought  that  had  we  postponed  the 


H 

employment  of  Dr.  Rock  a  little  longer,  Rev.  Weidler 
would  have  resigned.  That  may  be.  But  in  the  light  of 
his  obstinate  persistence  in  doing  the  very  unseemly  thing 
of  wanting  to  stay  where  he  was  not  wanted  and  could 
not  be  useful  we  do  not  now  thiak  so.  The  employment 
of  Dr.  Rock  seems  to  have  led  to  the  determination  with 
Revs.  Lowery  and  Weidler  that  they  would  fif?ht. 

12.  About  this  time  Rev.  D.  D.  Lowery  announced  in 
our  city  payers  that  Bishop  Hott  would  preach  in  Trinity 
church  the  first  Sabbath, morning  and  evening, in  Novem- 
ber. This  he  did  without  consulting  us.  The  bishop, presid- 
ing elder  and  Rev.  Weidler  came  to  the  city  on  Saturday 
and  went  straight  to  a  hotel.  One  of  our  brethren,  Ma- 
jor H.  P.  Moyer,  cashier  of  the  Farmer's  National  Bank, 
this  city,  went  to  them  and  entreated  them  not  to  stay  at 
the  hotel  but  to  accept  the  hospitality  of  our  homes. 
Bishop  Hott  said:  "No.  We  are  not  wanted  here  and  I 
have  the  money  in  my  pocket  to  pay  my  way."  Any 
one  can  see  that  for  the  good  of  the  church  we  did  not 
want  our  bishop,  in  a  city  in  which  there  are  1,200  or 
1,300  United  Brethren,  to  stay  at  a  hotel  while  here 
preaching  in  our  church.  Our  entreaties  failing,  we  ar- 
ranged for  a  meeting  on  Saturday  evening  at  the  home  of 
J.  B.  Ranch,  then  President  of  the  Farmers'  National 
Bank,  this  city,  of  precious  memory  and  now  in  lieav- 
en.  Our  entire  board  and  some  others  met  them  in  this 
meeting  and,  altera  long  and  warm  conference,,  in  which 
arbitration  was  talked  of,  we  adjourned  to  meet  again  on 
the  following  Monday  evening  and  to  open  the  church 
and  to  hear  the  bishop  preach  twice  the  next  day.  He 
tried  to  preach  the  next  morning  and  made  one  of  his  fa- 
mous jj  failures,  although  he  had  a  magnificent  audience 
and  then  said,  that  "feeling  quite  nervous  and  unwell, 
he  would  not  preach  in  the  evening."  They  returned  to 
their  hotel,  ate  their  dinner,  we  suppose,  and  after  dinner 
sent  us  a  proposed  plan  for  arbitration  and  left,  by  rail, 
for  Mountville, where  he  preached  that  evening,  notwith- 
standing he  was  "too  nervous  and  unwell"  to  preach  for  usc 


15 

"SVhi'le 'he  spent  Saturday  evening  in  urging  upon  our  con- 
sciences obedience  to  man  made  law  he  unnecessarily 
'broke  God's  Sabbath  law  in  the  using  of  a  Sunday  train. 
We  will  say  more  of  the  Saturday  night  meeting  and  of 
"his  failure  to  return  from  Mount\nlle  and  met't  us  in  offi- 
<cial  meeting  on  Monday  evening,  under  the  general  head 
of  "False  and  Damaging  Reports." 

13.  Soon  after  Dr.  Rock  moved  among  us  we  called  a 
•congregational  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  submitting  to 
it  the  action  of  the  official  board  in  employing  Dr.  Rock. 
This  meeting  was  very  largely  attended  and  unanimously 
•confirmed  our  action.  Rev.  Weidler,  seeking  to  enter 
the  church  to  preach,  we  forcibly  prohibited  him  from 
entering  for  any  other  purpose  than  as  a  worshipper. 

14.  He  then  appealed  to  the  courts,  rather  than  to 
fair  arbitration  and  the  law  of  the  church,  for  possession 
of  the  pulpit.  Couldn't  he  have  done  us  a  great  deal  of 
good  and  would  he  not  have  had  a  deal  of  joy(?)  if  he 
had  gotten  it ! 

15.  The  case  hung  in  the  courts  without  trial,  on  its 
merits,  when,  early  in  the  following  August  a  compro- 
mise was  effected.  Dr.  Rock  and  J.  B.  Raueh  having 
persuaded  Bishop  E.  B.  Kephart,  D.  D.,  to  act  as  arbiter, 
the  case  was  settled  by  Dr.  Rock  withdrawing,  Rev. 
Z.  A.  Weidler  resigning  and  taking  the  case  out  of  court. 
We  also  agreed  to  forget  what  of  the  past  would  be  un- 
pleasant and  unprofitable  to  remember  and  be  brethren , 
dwelling  together  "in  the  unity  of  the  spirit  and  in  the 
bonds  of  peace."  More  will  be  said  of  the  terms  of  this 
compromise  later  on. 

17.  Almost  two  months  later  we  sent  a  petition  to  the 
conference  convened  at  Penbrook,  asking  it  to  appoint 
Dr.  Rock  pastor  of  our  congregation.  This  petition  was 
signed  by  190  of  our  membership,  and  more  would  have 
signed  it  had  we  taken  more  time  and  it  was  presented 
to  the  stationing  committee  by  Major  H.  P.  Moyer,  cash- 
ier of  the  Farmers' National  Bank  ;  J.  Hunsicker,  man- 
ager of   the   Lebanon    Manufacturing   company;   J.    H. 


i6 

Seltzer,  President  of  the  Ivcbanon  Stove  Works;  C.  E.. 
Rauch,  one  of  the  leading  merchants  of  the  city,  and  E.- 
E.  McCurdy,  attorney-at-law,  the  first  two  being  mem- 
bers of  the  city  council,  and  all  of  them  among  the  very 
best  citizens  of  our  city.  After  we  cleared  away  some 
debris  that  some  one,  who  had  small  regard  for  the  truth 
when  a  lie  would  suit  him  better,  had  placed'  in  the  way, 
and  after  urging,  with  many  reasons,  the  appointment  of 
Dr.  Rock,  and,  after  promising  the  stationing  committee, 
composed  of  Bishop  Mills,  D.  D.,  Rev^.  H.  B.  Dohner 
and  D.  D.  Lowery,  "the  best  year  financially,  numeri- 
cally and  spiritually,  in  the  history  of  Trinity  church,'" 
the  bishop  was  very  much  in  favor  of  appointing  Dr. 
Rock,  but  the  other  members  of  the  committee  opposed 
it  to  the  last.  Besides  our  promise  to  the  committee, 'we 
urged  that  Dr.  Rock  not  only  suited  us  entirely  but  that 
he  was,  as  we  thought  then  and  thini?  now,  the  only  man 
that  could  rally  our  people  and  save  the  church.  And 
this  not  because  no  other  could  serve  us  just  as  well,  un- 
der different  conditions,  btrt  because  the  heart  of  our 
people  was  set  upon  him  and  many  would  not  forgive 
the  cruelty  of  shutting  him  out  of  the  pastorate  of  our 
church,  when  he,  with  his  family,  were  on  the  ground 
and  so  thoroughly  competent  to  do  us  good  work.  It  is 
worthy  of  note,  too,  that  Dr.  Rock  had,  up  to  this  time^. 
held  the  respect  and  good  will  of  our  people,  but  four  or 
five  persons  at  most,  and  had  not  had  an  unkind  word 
with  any  of  them.  At  that  time  he  could  have  rallied  all 
but  three  or  four,  and  could  save  all  but  a  very  few  yet  if 
he  were  made  pastor  in  the  regular  way.  Not  very  long 
ago,  and  just  before  the  parsonage  was  sold  for  debt,  Mr, 
Rigor  admitted  that  Dr.  Rock  could  save  everything  if 
he  had  it  to  himself. 

But  the  presiding  elder  gave  as  his  great  and  manly 
reason  for  refusing  the  appointment  "It  would  be  a  vic- 
tory for  Rock."  And  Mr.  Dohner  opposed  the  appoint- 
ment of  Dr.  Rock  "because  he  was  guilty  of  trespass," 
although  a  compromise  had  been  effected,  (we  might  say 


17 

affected  on  their  part )  in  which  the  unpleasant  past  was 
^o  be  forgiven  and  forgotten,  and  we  were  to  be 
"brethren"  dwelling  together  '4n  the  unity  of  the  spirit 
and  in  the  bonds  of  peace." 

The  conference  adjourned  without  making  any  ap- 
pointment to  Trinity.  Having  sent  us  word  of  their  pur- 
pose, the  stationing  committee  came  here  on  Monday  af- 
ter conference  and  held  a  three  hours'  meeting  with  our 
official  board.  Here  again  the  entire  board  urged  our 
reasons  for  the  appointment  of  Dr.  Rock  and  again  we 
promised  "the  best  year  financially,  numerically  and 
spiritually  in  the  history  of  the  church,"  and  plead, some 
of  us  with  tears,  for  the  appointment  of  Dr.  Rock.  Bish- 
op Mills  heartily  favored  the  appointment  but  Lowery 
and  Dohner  were  obstinate  to  the  last,  and  that  too,  after 
J.  B.  Ranch,  perhaps  the  best  man  among  us,  plead  with 
tears,  and  said,  "we  have  had  some  good  preachers  and 
some  good  pastors,  but  Dr.  Rock  is  the  best  all  around 
pastor  we  ever  had."  That  day  our  dear  brother  took 
a  cold  which  carried  him  to  his  grave  inside  three  weeks 
and  we  think  that  but  for  the  meeting  made  necessary  by 
the  stubbornness  of  two  members  of  the  c  ommittee  he 
would  be  here  to-day.  Whatevtr  the  reader  may  hear  to 
the  contrary,  Bro.  Ranch  was  as  indignant  as  any  of  us 
with  both  appointments,  was  ready  to  invest  much  money 
in  defending  our  rights,  and  would  not,  had  he  lived,  as- 
sisted Mr.  Rigor  in  fixing  things  up. 

1 8.  The  presiding  elder  soon  left  the  city  for  Harris- 
burg  and  that  evening  appointed  to  the  pastorate  of  our 
church  G.  W.  M.  Rigor,  a  man  to  whom  the  conference 
had  given  no  employment  for  six  preceding  years  and 
this  for  the  alleged  reason  of  his  inefficiency.  We  used 
to  pity  him  and  thought,  with  him,  that  he  was  refused  an 
appointment  during  all  those  years  because  of  the  ani- 
mosities engendered  by  the  Stoverdale  campmeeting 
fight .  We  thought  the  old  man  should  have  been  given 
some  small  and  less  important  charge,  but  we  beg  pardon 
of  the  conference  and  acknowledge  that  we  now  see  how, 


i8 

on  the  gronnds  of  inefi5ciency,  they  were  justified  in 
not  giving  him  charge  of  any  field  of  labor.  The 
presiding  elder  is  reported  as  saying  on  Friday  night 
before  appointing  him  on  Monday,  "The  poorest  charge 
in  the  conference  is  too  good  for  Rigor,"  or  words 
£o  that  effect.  Think  of  saying  this  of  a  man  and  then  in 
three  days  giving  him  the  best  appointment  east  of  Ohio. 
He  said  this  in  answer  to  a  plea  that  was  made  to  give 
Mr.  Rigor  some  light  work  at  least. 

19.  We  resolved  immediately  to  refuse  him  moral  or 
financial  support,  but  seeing  our  congregation  going  to 
pieces  and,  aware  that  our  people,  being  so  insulted  with 
the  refusal  to  appoint  Dr.  Rock  and  with  the  appoint- 
ment of  Mr.  Rigor,  that  they  could  not  be  rallied  and  the 
church  saved,  upon  the  suggestion  of  Dr.  Rock,  we  con- 
sented to  a  compromise  for  which  we  have  all  been  pain- 
fully sorry  a  thousand  times.  Dr.  Rock  made  the  sug- 
gestion in  good  faith  and  with  the  hope  that  it  would  se- 
cure peace  and  opon  the  way  for  doing  good.  The  com- 
promise provided  that  we  should  accept  and  support  Mr. 
Rigor  as  pastor  and  Dr.  Rock  was  to  be  made  assistant 
pastor.  It  was  a  humiliating  position  for  Dr.  Rock  but  he 
saw  and  we  knew  that  if  he  moved  out  of  the  city  our  con- 
gregation would  immediately  scatter  under  such  a  minis- 
try. Mr.  Rigor  declared  he  would  stay  if  he  did  not 
get  a  dollar.  During  the  time  we  tried  to  persuade 
him  to  resign,  and  in  one  of  our  official  meetings, 
he  was  asked  what  Weidler  should  have  done 
when  sent  here  and  rejected.  His  reply  was,  "He 
should  have  resigned."  When  told  that  the  conditions 
were  more  vexing  and  sensitive  than  a  year  before 
and  asked,  "Why  don't  you  resign  then?"  he  replied,  "I 
have  never  resigned  from  anything  and  do  not  intend  to 
break  my  record."  If  he  had  been  more  careful  about 
his  record  in  some  other  things  and  less  careful  in  this 
that  involved  no  honesty  or  veracity,  it  would  have  been 
much  to  his  advantage  and  ours.  Immediately  after  the 
compromise  he  proceeded  to  encourage   rivalry    between 


19 

the  factions,  made  a  disturbing  noise  here  and  elsewhere 
about  the  exercise  of  our  rights  in  elections,  and  contin- 
ued daily  to  ignore  and  violate  the  articles  of  the  com- 
promise into  which  he  not  only  entered  heartily,  but 
made  an  unsuccessful  effort  to  have  the  matter  compro- 
mised in  the  same  way,  substantially,  before  Dr.  Rock 
took  hold  of  it.  Rev.  I/Owery  says  he  was  pressed  into  it 
and  we  suppose  Mr.  Rigor  told  him  so,  but  Mr.  Rigor 
heartily  agreed  to  it  and  then  tried  hard  to  wriggle  out 
of  signing  what  he  had  agreed  to  when  it  was  reduced  to 
writing.  It  may  be  interesting  to  some  to  know  that 
Rev  Lowery  was  pressed  into  consenting  to  it,  and  only 
because  he  was  determined  we  should  not  have  Dr. 
Rock  in  any  official  capacity  whatever.  To  add  to  all 
Mr.  Rigor  lent  his  influence  to  the  calling  of  a  special 
session  of  the  conference,  reporting  that  we  were  insub- 
ordinate, when  so  far  from  being  true,  he  was  the  only 
one  of  our  number  not  keeping  the  articles  of  compro- 
mise which  he  signed  as  well  as  we.  We  gave  him 
moral  and  financial  support.  The  members  of  the  offi- 
cial board  that  entered  into  a  compromise  with  him 
heard  him  regularly,  and  with  all  this,  his  audiences 
numbet-ed  regularly  from  44  to  b5  before  the  special  ses- 
sion of  the  conference  and  from  19  to  44  since  that, while 
in  the  season  for  congregations.  Dr.  Rock  preaches  to  a 
full  house.  And  ]\Ir.  Rigor  went  to  that  conference  and 
voted  to  depose  all  our  officials  from  office  and  turn  every 
member,  his  friends  and  all,  out  of  the  church  without 
notice  much  less  trial;  and  this  he  did  when  he  was  paid 
his  salary  for  18  days  beyond  the  date  of  the  conference. 
Reader,  would  you  receive  and  support  such  a  man  to 
teach  you  and  your  children  righteousness  ?  And  if  our 
law  really  gives  unbridled  authority  to  some  jealous,  en- 
vious, self-willed,  self-interested,  egotistic,  bigoted,  stub- 
born and  unstatesman-like  presiding  elder  to  make  such 
appointments,  and  puts  him  under  no  compulsion  to  as- 
sist in  dismissing  the  most  consummate  inefficiency  im- 
aginable, and  if  it  upholds  such  an  appointee   in  forcing 


himself  upon  a  people  to  whom  he  is  already  odious  and 
for  whom  he  can  do  no  good  whatever,  and  leaves  them 
without  appeal  or  redress  of  any  kind  but  the  disgraceful 
one  of  starving  him  out,  does  it  not  sadly  need  radical 
change  and  improvement?  Is  there  not  something  here 
for  the  next  General  Conference  to  do  to  harmonize  the 
law  with  rights  and  with  the  American  and  Christian 
spirit  ? 

20.  Last  of  all  came,  on  June  12th,  1896,  the  special 
session  (blunder)  of  East  Penna,  Conference,  called  for 
the  alleged  purpose  of  saving  the  church  from  sale  and  to 
restore  peace  to  the  much  disturbed  congregation;  but  it 
succeeded  in  committing  the  greatest  blunder  and  the 
most  daring  piece  of  high-handed  lawlessness  known  in 
the  history  of  the  church.  It  cost  I31  to  bring  Bishop 
Weaver  from  Dayton  and  $35  to  bring  Bishop  Kephart 
from  Fort  Scott,  Kansas.  In  all  it  cost  the  conference 
not  much  short  of  $400  and  who  will  pay  "the  fiddler." 
Why  the  dear  laity  of  course,  the  people  that  have  no 
voice  in  the  selection  of  a  pastor  and  who  must  submit 
to  the  rule  of  clericallords  over  God's  heritage  when  they 
see  fit  to  arbitrarily  override  their  most  courteous  and 
reasonable  petitions. 

But  from  a  political  standpoint  we  might  rejoice  over 
the  action  of  the  special  conference,  for  it  not  only  shows 
how  very  wise  and  great  men  can  lose  their  heads  and 
commit  great  blunders  and  how  little  regard  some  men, 
who  appoint  themselves  guardians  of  the  law  and  keep- 
ers' of  the  church's  purity,  have  for  the  law,  when  they 
wish  to  carry  a  po  int,  but  it  also  showed  the  bigoted  and 
persecuting  spirit  of  our  oppressors,  and  brought  almost 
everybody  who  knows  of  the  action  to  our  side. 

This  is  all  we  will  write  of  the  special  conference  un- 
der the  general  subject  of  mitigating  circumstances  since 
we  wish  to  call  it  up  again  under 


2T 

THINGS  UNLAWFUL. 

There  has  been  so  much  said  by  members  of  the  con- 
ference and  a  few  others  about  the  disobedience  of  Dr. 
Rock  and  ourselves  "to  the  order  and  discipline  of  the 
church"  that  we  think  something  should  be  said  here  to 
show  who  the  great  law  breakers  are.  If  we  did  any- 
thing unlawful,  they  more.  And  on  their  side,  not  only 
did  the  members  of  the  conference  transgress,  but,  sad 
to  write  it,  bishops  and  ex-bishops  were  among  the 
transgressors.  If  we  have  done  things  not  commenda- 
ble, we  have  some  royal  company'. 

First  of  all,  the  conference  used  $495  of  Church  exten- 
sion money,  which  the  people  gave  to  build  churches,  to 
pay  Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler,  their  law3'ers  and  court  costs. 
Rev.  Weidler  receiving  ^100  of  it,  and  the  balance  was 
used  to  pay  their  lawyer  and  their  court  costs — money  not 
given  for  any  such  purpose. 

Secondly,  certain  of  them  drew  $300  out  of  the  Mis- 
sionary treasury  and  gave  it  to  Rev.  Weidler,  and  this 
without  the  conference  taking  action  upon  it  before  or 
since  and  when  Trinity  was  not  a  mission  nor  was  Rev. 
Weidler  a  missionary.  That  was  a  perversion  and  mis- 
use of  sacred  funds  given  by  the  people  for  a  special  pur- 
pose and  could  not  be  used  legally, for  any  other  purpose. 
And  yet  after  receiving  these  |4oo,illigitemately  bestowed, 
and  some  other  money  and  donations  given  by  the  peo- 
ple hare.  Rev.  Weidler  stood  upon  the  conference  floor 
last  fall  and  said  that  during  the  year  his  children  had 
gone  to  bed  hungry  and  crying  for  food  and  at  times  they 
did  not  have  shoes  fit  to  go  to  school.  At  the  same  time 
he  occupied  a  house, the  rent  of  which  was  I15  per  month, 
and  seemed  to  have  money  to  go  to  Harrisburg  and  else- 
where every  now  and  then. 

Thirdly,  during  all  last  year,  excepting  the  special 
session  to  which  reference  has  been  made,  the  presiding 
elder  refused  to  recognize  our  quarterly  conference  and 
held  a  bogus  quarter!}-  conference,  each   quarter,  in    the 


home  of  Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler  and  within  the  bounds  of 
the  East  German  Conference,-  and  with  not  more  than 
two  of  our  officials  present  at  any  meeting  This  he  did 
although  we  were  not  disorganized,  nor  could  we  be 
by  his  ipn  dijclt.  Nor  did  we  even  think  of  denying  him 
the  privilege  of  holding  the  quarterly  conference  in  our 
church.  In  that  "rump"  quarterly  conference  they  elected 
a  third  member  of  the  committee  to  try  Dr.  Rock  for  tres- 
pass,although  Dr.  Rock's  committeeman  was  doing  his  best 
to  secure  a  satisfactory  third  man,  and  when  he  f  died  our 
quarterly  conference  alone  had  authority  to  elect  one  They 
elected  Rev.  J.  Dickson,  D.  D.,  who  heartily  consented 
fo  act  upon  such  an  election  and  met,  at  Harrisburg.with 
the  presiding  elder  and  other  members  of  the  committee 
and  with  Revs.  Meredith  and  Ludwig,  the  prosecutors  in 
the  case,  and  proceeded  to  try  Dr.  Rock  with  a  commit- 
tee of  two,  when  the  discipline  requires  three,  without 
Dr.  Rock  or  his  counsel  being  present,  and  without  any 
witnesses  for  the  defense,  and  without  hearing  anything 
on  his  behalf.  The  farcical  trial  ended,  star  chamber 
fashion,  they  rendered  the  predetermined  verdict  of 
guilty  and  later  Dickson  and  Lyter,  the  two  members  of 
the  committee,  suspended  him.  It  reminds  us  of  some 
of  the  farcical  trials  of  the  days  of  the  Inquisition  and  of 
a  recent  trial  and  execution  of  a  Cuban  patriot  by  the 
Spaniards. 

Does  any  one  ask, why  Dr.  Rock  did  not  attend  the  far- 
cical trial  at  Harrisburg  ?  He  knew  a  third  man  had  not 
been  properly  elected,  that  the  trial  could  not  legally 
proceed,  as  has  been  decided  by  the  bishops,  and  he 
would  not  recognize  the  illegal  court.  He  was  always 
ready  for  trial  and  even  wished,  with  us,  for  a  chance  to 
be  heard  before  a  legal  and  unbiased  court.  Neither  Dr. 
Rock  nor  ourselves  are  worried  about  the  sham,  for  it  is 
destined  to  hurt  those  who  did  the  unlawful  thing,  more 
than  it  will  hurt  him.  We  only  want  the  people  to  see 
that  neither  their  knowledge  of  nor  their  respect  for  the 
law  is  so  great  as  they  pretend. 


23 

And  thanks  to  the  Board  of  Bishops,  who  by  decision 
No.  15  declared  Lowery's  quarterly  conference,  Dickson 
as  a  committeeman,  and  Dr.  Rock's  trial  and  suspension, 
all  bogus. 

And  now  Dickson  and  the  rest,  who  were  disobedient 
•*'to  the  order  and  discipline  of  the  church  "  should  make 
their  confession  and  also  have  somebody  prosecute  and 
suspend  them.  How  would  they  like  charges  preferred 
against  them,  and  to  be  tried  and  suspended  by  an  un- 
lawful committeeman  ?  We  await  their  confession  and 
so  do  those  who  know  the  facts.  They  are  just  as  guilty 
of  "disobedience  to  the  order  and  discipline  of  the 
•church"  as  Dr.  Rock  was.  Not  only  in  one  thing,  but 
:some  of  them  in  several,  as  this  chapter  will  show. 

We  want  all  to  notice  that  a  man,  a  former  bishop, who 
has  taken  so  much  pains  to  help  the  conference  make 
war  on  us,  has  not  been  innocent  himself. 

Again,  in  October,  1894,  the  Conference  laid  the  penal- 
ty' of  no  employment  for  a  year  upon  two  preachers  whose 
characters  they  had  passsed  a  day  or  two  before.  And 
this  they  did  while  Bishop  Hott  was  presiding,  and  he 
permitted  it  without  protest.  Again,  that  same  confer- 
ence appropriated  $300  to  Boehm  church,  Reading,  a 
very  prominent  mission,  and  a  regularly  registered 
church,  and  at  the  suggestion  of  the  presiding  elder, have 
not  paid  it  to  this  day.  Our  presiding  elder  also  refused 
to  appoint  that  church  any  pastor,  because  it  wa  nted  one 
of  these  men  the  Conference  resolved  not  to  employ. 
Having  no  pastor  they  afterward  employed  the  man  they 
wanted,  and,  for  this  reason,  the  I300  were  withheld. 
They  gave  exactly  that  amount  of  missionery  money  to 
Rev.  Weidler  that  year.  It  is  still  due  the  congregation, 
and,  of  course,  they  will  get  it.  They  have  recourse  to 
the  civil  law  to  compel  these  lawbreakers  to  perform 
their  legal  and  moral  duties  and  keep  their  promises. 

In  the  bogus  quarterly  conference,  to  which  reference 
has  been  made,  the  presiding  elder  and  his  supporters 
elected  a  lay  delegate  to  the  annual  conference  and   the 


conference  admitted  him  to  a  seat  in  the  body  at  both' 
the  regular  and  special  sessions,  and  this  last  they  did  af- 
ter the  Board  of  Bishops  had  decided  that  the  annual 
conference  is  alone  competent  to  deal  with  an  insubordi- 
nate congregation. 

Last  and  most  presumptious  and  lawless  of  all,  if  that 
is  possible,  a  majority  asked  the  bishop  to  call  a  special 
session  of  conference  on  June  i:?,  1896  It  was  set  going 
that  we  intended  to  sell  the  church,  and  the  conference 
was  called  to  save  the  church  from  sale.  False  as  the 
report  was,  whoever  was  the  father  of  the  lie,  the  confer- 
ence convened  and  Bishop  Kephart  presided,  assisted  by 
Bishop  Weaver.  Bishop  Hott  was  also  present.  With- 
out giving  us  any  notice  or  warning  of  their  intended  ac- 
tion and  after,  in  conference  assembled,  making  the  com- 
plaint of  insubordination  and  inefficiency  against  us, they 
proceeded,  against  several  dissenting  votes,  to  adopt  the 
following  resolutions  : 

First — That  in  order  to  exercise  a  proper  and  legitimate 
control  and  jurisdiction  over  the  property  of  the  afore- 
said Trinit}-  United  Brethren  church,  so  as  to  preserve 
and  maintain  it  as  a  place  of  worship  for  all  who  are  in 
harmony  and  in  full  sympathy  with  the  doctrines  and 
discipline  of  the  church  of  the  United  Brethren  in 
Christ,  and  choose  to  unite  themselves  in  membership 
under  these  conditions  with  the  said  Trinity  church,  and 
for  inefficienc}',  the  trustees,  leaders,  stewards,  Sunday- 
school  superintendent,  president  of  the  Y.  P.  S.  C.  E. 
and  all  other  officers  whatsoever  are  hereby  deposed  from 
office,  and  the  arrangement  entered  into  between  the  offi- 
cial members  and  Rev.  R.  Rock  is  hereby  disannulled 
and  set  aside,  and  the  said  Trinity  church  is  hereby  de- 
clared disorganized  and  the  church  vacant. 

Second — That  a  board  of  trustees  be  elected  by  this 
conference,  as  per  discipline,  page  103,  chapter  11,  para- 
graph 10,  relative  to  abandoned  church  houses;  and  that 
the  said  board  of  trustees,  to  be  appointed  by  this  con- 
ference, take  immediate   possession  of  the  said  Trinity 


25 

church  property,  and  make  such  provision  as  may  be  ab- 
solutely necessary  for  its  absolute  security  against  loss 
to  the  conference  and  the  church  of  the  United  Br-ethren 
in  Christ,  and  that  said  board  of  trustees  continue  in  of- 
fice until  a  regularly  constituted  quarterly  conference  of 
said  church  may  elect  a  board  of  trustees  of  its  own. 

Third — That  the  said  Trinity  church  be  constituted  a 
charge  and  be  supplied,  as  per  discipline,  with  a  pastor, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  proceed  at  once  to  organize  a, 
society  with  such  members  of  the  church  of  the  United 
Brethren  in  Christ  as  are  known  to  be  in  strict  accord 
with  the  doctrines  and  government  of  said  church  ;  and 
also  that  provision  be  made  by  this  conference  for  tjie 
support,  if  necessary,  of  said  pastor. 

It  should  be  said  here  that  we  have  very  good  reasons 
to  believe  that  many  voted  for  these  resolutions  and  the 
preamble  to  them  in  violation  of  their  own  couvictiocs 
and  better  judgment,  because  they  feared  punishment 
at  conference  time,  from  the  leaders  in  this  persecution 
against  us. 

With  no  specific  charges  against  any  one  in  particular 
they  proceeded  to  put  an  end  to  the  pastorates  of  both 
Dr.  Rock  and  Mr.  Rigor,to  annul  our  contract  with  both, 
to  depose  all  members  of  our  quarterly  conference,  to  dis- 
organize the  society,  turn  every  member  out  of  church, 
declare  the  house  abandoned  and  vacant,  to  elect  a  new 
board  of  trustees,  constituted  Trinity  a  charge,  and  to 
provide  for  the  appointment  of  some  new  pastor  to  organ- 
ize "a  new  society"  in  the  old  and  vacanti  ?)  church  apd 
by  a  legislative  act,  authorized  him  to  receive  into  this 
"new  society"  such  United  Brethren  as  are  known  to  be 
in  strict  accord  with  the  doctrines  and  government  of  the 
United  Brethren  ckurch.  Think  of  receiving  into  the 
United  Brethren  church  those  who  are  already  United 
Brethren  ! 

Rev.  D.  D.  Lowery,  the  presiding  elder,  immediately 
appointed  Mr.  Rigor  pastor  of  the  "new  society,"  he  ac- 
cepted the  appointment  aad  now  com^s  here  and  imposes 


26 

hiinself  upon  us  as  our  pastor.  This  he  does,  although 
Rev.  Lowery  said  he  did  not  suppose  there  was  a  man  in 
the  conference  weak-minded  enough  to  want  to  go  where 
he  is  not  wanted. 

Some  who  took  part  in  the  infamy  are  now  saying,  we 
were  not  turned  out  of  church,  and  this  because  they 
would  shake  off  the  odium  of  the  monstrous  thing.  But 
it  is  apparent  that  this  extraordinary  action  was  taken  to 
prevent  the  members  of  the  church,  should  they  not 
dismiss  all,  from  reelecting  the  old  officers  to  fill  the  va- 
rious offices  of  the  church.  In  the  discussion  of  the  res- 
olutions on  the  floor  of  the  special  conference  the  im- 
pression was  made  upon  the  conference  and  others,  by 
Bishop  Kephart,  that  the  pastor  of  the  "new  society" 
could  exercise  discretionary  judgment  in  receiving  mem- 
bers into  it  who  are  known  to  be  "  1  oyal  to  the  conference. ' ' 
Mark  you,  "loyal  to  the  conference,"  as  if  the  confer- 
ence were  greater  than  the  church,  instead  of  being  a 
small  fraction  of  it.  Then  think  of  giving  G.  W.  M. 
Rigor  authority  to  determine  whether  we  were  fit  to 
join  the  Untied  Brethren  church  !  And  although 
the  Court  of  our  county  restrained  C.  B.  Rettew,  Rev.  H. 
B.  Dohner  and  Rev.  Daugherty,  their  new  board  of  trus- 
tees for  Trinity,  who  came  here  and  sat  about  in  our 
church  from  Friday  until  Monday,  and  by  unlawful  en- 
trance and  use  of  our  church,  menaced  the  peace  and 
good  order  of  our  people,  from  carrying  out  their  instruc- 
tions and  ordered  matters  to  remain  in  the  same  state  as 
they  were  before  the  special  session,  yet  Rev.  Rigor  re- 
fused one  of  our  most  excellent  young  men,  of  noted  pi- 
ety and  scholarship,  a  certificate  of  membership,  that  he 
might  take  it  with  him  when  he  goes  to  college,  because 
he  had  not  joined  this  "new  society."  This  young  man 
has  been  for  a  number  of  years  and  is  now  a  member  of 
high  standing  in  the  Trinity  U-  B.  church  and  has  never 
taken  an  active  part  in  this  contest.  This  is  the  way 
these  resolutions  were  to  work.  Now  if  that  is  not  high- 
handed   lawlessness   and   ecclesiastical   lynch    law,   we 


27 

should  like  some  reader  of  this  pamphlet  to  write  and 
tell  us  what  it  is. 

The  saddest  of  all,  for  our  dear  Zion  and  the  cause  of 
Jesus,  is  that  three  bishops  were  present  and  encouraged 
this  lawlessness.  Bishop  Kephart  presided  and  indulged 
it  as  legal.  Bishop  Weaver  saii  it  could  be  done  on  the 
ground  of  inefficiency,  and  Hott  said  what  is  not  true 
and  what  he  had  no  evidence  for  saying,  that,  "the  first 
time  I  was  there  (November,  1894,)  I  saw  plainly  that 
these  men  were  planning  to  sell  the  church  and  get  con- 
trol of  it."  If  we  cared  as  much  for  ourselves  and  as  little 
for  the  cause  of  Christ  as  he  seems  to  care,  we  would  add 
to  this  controversy  by  prosecuting  him  in  the  church  for 
falsehood  and  slander,  and  bring  an  action  for  damages 
against  him  in  the  civil  courts.  And  we  would  also  prose- 
cute several  men  for  egregious  acts  of  disobedience 
"to  the  order  and  discipline  of  the  church,"  and  the 
immoralities  of  falsehood  and  slander.  We  have  also 
excellent  grounds  upon  which  to  base  civil  actions  and 
recover  heavy  damages  from  conference  for  its  high- 
handed slander  and  interference  with  our  rights.  If  this 
thing  is  not  soon  stopped  we  shall  be  obliged  to  secure 
redress  in  the  civil  courts  where  cases  are  tried  on  the  law 
and  evidence  and  not  on  prejudice,  bigotry  and  hearsa3^ 
With  so  much  light  on  their  lawlessness,  we  appeal  to  the 
church  and  ask,  is  their  course  with  us  consistent  and 
christian?  Had  they  not  better  say,  "  We  will  concede 
your  rights  and  henceforth  behave  ourselves  better  and 
be  brethren  ?" 

Here  will  be  a  proper  place  to  speak  of  the  iusencerity 
of  the  friendship  Lowery,  et  al  ,  pretend  for  Mr.  Rigor. 
For  six  years  they  held  him  at  arms  length,  had  no  cor- 
dial fellowship  with  him,  gave  him  no  employment  and, 
htt  said,  all  because  he  did  not  agree  with  them  touching 
Stoverdale  campmeeting  matters.  And  now  they  pre- 
tend to  love  each  other  !  It  is  the  friendship  of  Herod  and 
Aggrippa  when  they  combined  to  crucify  our  Lord.  We 
hold  a  letter,  written  from  the  last  annual  session  of  Bast 


28 

Pelinsylvania  Conference,  to  a  member  of  Triaity  cBurch, 
in  which  Mr.  Rigor  gives  to  the  actions  of  the  coafer- 
ejtjce  toward  himself  and  us,  the  euphonious  appellation 
of  "hell  deviltry."  He  says,  "Such  bungling  in  an  an- 
nual conference  I  never  saw,  much  less  heard  of."  He 
characterized  it  as  "the  storm  of  Ring-rule"  and  as  "hell 
deviltry. '  ' '  And  now  they  are  friends  and  they  send  him 
here  to  serve  us.  They  would  not  be  friends  now  il  they 
could  not  use  him  to  serve  their  unholy  purposes,  for  we 
h§ive  no  idea  they  are  any  more  religious  than  they  were 
a  year  ago. 

This  will  also  be  a  logical  and  proper  place  to  speak  of 
the  inconsistency  and  insincerity  of  the  Conference  con- 
vened to  save  (?)  Trinity  church.  At  the  same  time  they 
Were  planning  to  save  (?)  a  church  which  is  in  no  peril 
but  from  their  own  intolerance  and  arbitrary  rule,  Pleas- 
ant Hill  church,  of  this  city,  was  under  the  sheriff's  ham- 
mer, and  Royalton  church  was  already  sold  and  to-day 
awaits  redemption,  while  last  fall,  BOehm  church,  Read- 
ing, which  they  supplied  with  a  pastor  for  three  prece- 
ding years,  and  one  of  the  best  new  churches  in  the 
east,  and  one  of  the  very  best  locations  to  be  found  in 
any  city  for  building  up  a  strong  congregation,  they  re- 
fused to  mother  any  longer,  and  turned  it  over  to  the 
East  German  Conference,  and  all  because  our  great  pre- 
siding elder  could  not  just  exactly  have  his  own  way  with 
the  plucky  little  congregation  that  had  furnished  the 
money  and  had  done  the  work.  It  is  growing  and  will 
live  to  be,  ere  long,  a  bright  star  in  the  crown  of  the 
:©ast  German  Conference.  Why  were  not  the  officers  and 
members  of  Pleasant  Hill  and  Royalton  churches  expelled 
and  turned  out  for  inefficiency  by  this  same  conference  ? 
The  answer  is,  they  had  no  quarrel  with  them.  Is  it  not 
about  time  that  they  stop  their  chatter  and  accusations 
about  lawlessness  in  othess  and  look  to  their  own  doings  ? 
Are  they  not  a  little  deeper  in  the  mud  than  we  are  in 
the  mire  ?  Is  it  not  about  time  for  the  pot  to  cease  its 
charge  of  blackness  against  the  kettle  ?    It  should  be  re- 


29 

-membered  too  tTiat  they  carrtiot  apologize  for  tbeir  law- 
lessness by  saying,  "We  provoked  them."  They  have 
been,  as  all  can  see,  lawless  in  several  things  entirely  dis- 
tinct from  the  Trinity  controversy. 

FALSE     AND     DAMAGING 
REPORTS. 

In  order  to  gain  and  hold  favor  with  the  ministers  and 
people  throughout  the  Conferemre  and  elsewhere,  certain 
men  have  manufactured  and  circulated  several  accusa- 
tions against  us.  A  few  of  these  we  wish  to  mention,  and 
to  them  append  our  positive  denial. 

First  among  these  they  say  that  if  A.  S.  Light,  our  del- 
egate to  the  conference  in  1894,  had  not  made  such  a 
caustic  speech  on  the  conference  floor,  Dr.  Rock  would 
have  been  appointed.  In  reply  to  this  and  in  addi- 
tion to  many  commendations  from  others,  Mr.  Light  has 
a  letter  from  Bishop  Hott,  and  written  a  short  time  after 
the  conference,  in  which  he  commends  Mr.  Light's  re- 
marks on  the  conference  floor  in  the  following  lan- 
guage :  "I  ought  say  to  you  in  all  candor  that  your 
address  or  speeches  before  the  conference  were,  by  my- 
self, and  by  all  who  I  heard  speak  of  them— and  there 
were  not  a  few  of  them,— regarded  as  able  and  manly  and 
pervaded  by  a  noble  and  kindly  spirit.  For  yourself 
and  your  church  you  made  many  friends.  I  am  not 
capable  of  flattery  ;  this  is  the  plain  truth."  This  is 
certainly  a  sufiicient  reply  to  that  puny  excuse  for  not 
appointing  Dr.  Rock. 

Besides  this  Rev.  Weidler  expected,  before  Conference 
convened,  that  he  would  be  sent  to  Trinity.  He  must 
have  had  assurances,  and  Rev.  C.  J.  Kephart,  also  shortly 
before  Conference,  when  Dr.  Rock's  appointment  was 
talked  of,  said,  "There  is  another  wind  blowing." 

There  has  also  been  a  good  deal  of  chatter  about  the 
trouble,  this  year,  never  happening  if  it  had  not  been 
for  A.  S.  Light  and  E.  E.  MaCurdy.  Our  reply  to  this 
is  that  the  presiding  elder  not  only  showed  perfect  ab- 


5?7 

absence  of  statesmanship  and  the  christian  spirit,  in  the- 
appointment  of  Mr.  Rigor,  but  we  were  all  astonished 
and  insulted.  And  the  very  few  who  gathei  about  hini 
and  pretend  to- be  pleased  with  him  would  have  been  the 
first  ta  have  criticised  the  appointment  in  a  time  cf 
peace  in  the  church.  The  insulting  appointment  and 
the  assertivenesSr  dictum  and  officiousness  of  Mr.  Rigor 
and  his  gossiping  and  encouragement  of  rivalries  both  be- 
fore and  after  the  compromise,  with  his  leanness  and 
slang  in  the  pulpit,,  and  his  impracticable  bungling^ 
led  some  of  our  brethren,,  who  are  more  capable 
of  abhoring  that  which  is  evil  and  of  holy  and  fervid  in- 
dignation against  a  great  outrage, to  use  warm  and  strong 
words  to  express  their  feelings  and  rebuke  the  out- 
rage and  the  daring  and  offensive  of&ciousness.  And 
the  men  who  have  so  much  ta  say  about  it  would  not 
bear  it  any  better  than  we  do,,  most  likely  not  so  well, 
and  they  can  and  have  used  warmer,  and  senseless, 
wards  in  denauncing  things  not  nearly  or  necessarily  so 
menacing  or   offensive. 

In  addition  to  this,  three  of  their  number  have  recently 
indicattd  that  Dr  Rock  was  sent  aver  here  to  destroy 
"Shueyism"  in  the  East.  Not  long  ago  Rev.  C.  J  Kep- 
hart,  D.  D.,  said  to  Brother  J  H.  Hunsieker  that  *'Rock 
was  sent  over  here  to  destroy  Shueyism  in  the  East,  but 
Shuey ism  is  stronger  in  the  church  than  ever  before." 
Rev.  Grant  Shaffer  also  said  to  Brother  Boaz  Light;, 
"this  is  not  a  fight  between  the  Conference  and  Trinity 
only,  but  between  Shueyism  and  Anti- Shueyism."  And 
the  presiding  elder  lately  said  to  one  of  our  preachers , 
*'If  Rock  had  not  been  sent  over  here  to  destroy 
Shueyism  in  the  east,  he  would  have  been  appointed  by 
the  Conference."  This  is  already  a  jargon  of  voices. 
Probably  this  is  one  of  Bishop  Hott's  "deeper  elements  in 
the  case." 

At  the  first  we  heard  it  suggested  that  Bro.  W.  J.  Shuey, 
onr  publishing  agent  at  Dayton,  Ohio,  had  something  to 
do  with  our  disappointment,  but  we  did  not  see  how,  and 


3T 

•so  tliought  no  more  about  it.  If  what  these  brethren  say 
is  true,  it  has  that  appearance.  We  knew  that  Bro.  Shuey 
did  not  feel  so  well  toward  Dr  Rock,  but  -we  could  not 
and  cannot  see  why  he,  or  any  other,  should  join  in  the 
destruction  of  one  of  the  strongest  U.  B.  churches  in  th« 
East  to  gratify  the  savage  joy  of  revenge  on  Dr.  Rock. 
We  cannot,  we  do  not,  think  a  man  in  his  position,  and 
as  one  of  the  chief  officers  of  the  church,  who  must,  for 
business  reasons,  avoid  offending  any  one,  and  keep 
friendship  with  all  our  people,  is,  in  the  least  responsible 
for  our  trouble,  and  that  he  would  demand  that  one  of 
the  best  congregations  in  the  church  must  be  sacrificed 
to  save  "Shueyism." 

Is  this  a  political  tnck  conjured  up  to  win  Bro. 
Shuey 's  sympathy  and  support  for  themselves  in  their 
•extraordinary  and  unpardonable  course  ?  Is  this  an  ac- 
knowledgement that  they  are  losing  support  in  the  East 
and  must  go  West  for  help  ?  We  know  they  need  sym- 
pathy and  will  need  more  before  this  is  over.  If  Dr. 
Rock  was  sent  here  to  destroy  "Shueyism"  in  the  east, 
he  never  told  us  so.  But  he  authorizes  us  to  say  that  he 
never  knew  that  he  was  sent  by  any  one,  or  that  he  was 
on  such  an  errand.  Besides  this,  and  so  far  from  being 
sent  on  such  an  errand,  we  heard  him  defend  Bro. 
Shuey  against  any  part  in  it  early  in  the  controversy-. 
None  of  us  ever  heard  or  thought  Dr.  Rock  on  such  a 
mission.  Dr.  Rock  was  not  sent  here  but  came  at  our 
request  so  unexpected  to  him.  We  feel  assured  that  he 
did  not  come  on  the  small  errand  of  fighting  "Shuey ism" 
but  to  build  up  the  kingdown  of  Jesus  Christ,  and,  the 
longer  he  is  among  us,  the  more  do  we  believe  he  could 
do  finely,  with  a  fair  chance.  But  if  these  brethren  cor- 
rectly represent  this  matter,  we  appeal  to  the  ministers 
and  laity  whether  we  are  to  be  persecuted  to  death  to 
preserve  "Shueyism"  or  any  other  personal  "ism". 
Moreover  Bro.  Shuey  said  himself,  last  fall,  on  hearing 
that  Mr.  Rigor  was  sent  here,  that  "the  conference 
should  have  appointed  Dr.  Rock  to  Trinity".     He  knew, 


3^ 

as  all  know,  that  the  conference  has  carried  this  matter 
too  far.  No,  this  is  more  like  a  contest  carried  on  to- 
save  Loweryism,  Hottism,  Kephartism,  (C.  J.)  and 
Dohnerism  in  the  East  Pennsylvania  Conference,  and 
this  one  oi  the  most  egotistic,  bigoted,  shortsighted,  self- 
willed,  persistent,  undiplomatic,  and  pusillanimous 
-'^'isms"  ever  hatched. 

It  has  been  put  out  that  we  were  planning  to  sell  the 
church  and  go  to  the  Presbyterians.  We  were  not  then, 
nor  are  we  now,  planning  to  sell  the  church,  nor  have  we 
any  notion  to  go  to  the  Presbyterians,  good  place  as  that 
would  be  tago  to.  "We  are  brethren,"  and  better  ones- 
than  our  unbrotherly  and  tyrannical  oppressors.  We 
were  in  the  church  before  some  of  the  "bosses" 
that  persecute  us  and  we  intend  to  stay.  We  do  not  like 
everything  but  do  not  intend  to  accept  Bishop  Weaver's 
advice  and  "go  out."  In  1&56  Abraham  Lincoln  said^ 
before  the  Illinois  convention  where  the  Republican 
party  was  organized,  "We  will  not  go  out  of  the 
Union  and  you  shall  not' ' .  So  we  will  not  go  out  of  the 
church.  We  will  do  just  what  Bishop  Weaver  wisely 
did  when  things  did  not  suit  him  ;  we  will  stay  and 
make  things  better.  This  is  our  privilege  and  duty  so 
long  as  improvement  is  possible.  We  will  stay  and 
labor  for  equality  of  rights  and  against  arbitrary  rule 
an  unchristian  management  of  christian  affairs.  We  will 
contend  for  our  rights  until  the  law  is  so  interpreted 
or  made  as  to  secure  them  and  our  church  and  polity 
are  more  nearly  perfect. 

Again  they  say,  we  planned  to  sell  the  parsonage* 
Bishop  Kephart  said,  in  the  special  session  of  con- 
ference, that  we  placed  the  mortgages  on  the  par- 
sonage and  church  in  order  to  sell  them,  and 
Bishop  Hott  said  that  "he  saw  plainly,  the  first  time  he 
was  here,  that  we  were  planning  to  sell  the  church  and 
get  control  of  it."  He  saw  no  sfuch  thing,  for  no  such 
thiltag  was  dreamed  of,  much  less  planned  for.  Preachers 
aii©uld  tell    the    truth    afid    bishops    $iiouId    gueas   at 


33 

nothing.  Guessing  is  not  evidence  in  the  courts. 
The  mortgage  was  placed  upon  the  parsonage  more  than 
twenty  years  ago,  and  half  of  the  principal  was  paid 
seven  or  eight  years  ago,  and  the  interest  was  paid,  when 
due,  ever  since.  The  man  who  lent  the  money  on  this 
mortgage  has  been  dead  more  than  nine  years.  We  did 
not  plan  to  sell  the  parsonage.  The  interest  and  mort- 
gage were  due,  and  the  mortgage  was  foreclosed  because 
we  did  not  pay  the  interest  when  due.  We  did  not  pay 
because  we  do  not  intend  to  foot  the  bills  and  permit  the 
presiding  elder  and  his  henchmen  to  lord  it  over  us  and 
do  all  the  commanding.  We  do  not  believe  in  taxation 
without  representation  When  our  rights  are  respected 
we  will  pay  as  heretofore,  and  we  are  not  ashamed  to 
have  the  whole  church  examine  our  annual  reports  to  the 
conference  for  the  twenty-five  years  preceding  this  con- 
troversy. The  mortgage  on  the  church  house  was  placed 
to  cover  a  debt  mainly  incurred  during  the  pastorate  of 
Rev  C.  J.  Kephart.  Said  mortgage  was  placed  by  the 
approval  and  aid  of  Revs.  Lowery  and  Rigor,  as  the  re- 
cords of  our  court  show . 

Another  thing  that  they  have  freely  circulated  to  jus- 
tify their  conduct  at  the  last  conference, the  appointment 
of  Mr.  Rigor,  and  to  injure  us  with  the  people,  is,  that 
we  agreed  in  the  compromise  at  Mt.  Gretna,  early  in 
August,  1895,  not  to  ask  again  for  Dr.  Rock  for  pastor, 
and  to  accept  an  appointment  from  the  conference.  On 
page  12  of  the  last  conference  minutes,  and  in  the  report 
of  Rev  D.  D.  Lowery,  he  says:  "I  am  sorry,  brethren,  to 
tell  you  that  I  have  been  grievously  disappointed  These 
men  of  Lebanon  Trinity  were  here  yesterday  to  express 
it  as  their  purpose  not  to  abide  by  the  terms  of  settlement 
commonly  understood  and  accepted  by  us."  Each 
and  all  of  us  who  were  at  that  meeting,  and  Dr.  Rock 
besides,  are  ready  to  make  affirmation  before  a  justice, 
that  this  is  not  only  not  true, by  whomsoever  reported, but 
that  the  thing  was  not  mentioned  in  the  meeting  in 
which  the  compromise  was  effected .  At  the  suggestion  of 


34 

one,  not  of  our  number,  who  was  much  interested  in 
bringing  about  a  compromise.  Dr.  Rock  wrote  the  fol- 
lowing paper  which  was  before  the  meeting  for  compro- 
mise and,  although  not  formall)^  adopted,  formed  the 
basis  and  included  all  the  terms  of  the  compromise  : — 

Having  a  Christian  desire  to  bring  to  a  peaceful  and 
happy  end  the  very  unfortunate  and  unpleasant  contro- 
versy in  Trinity  United  Brethren  church,  Ivcbanon,  Pa. 

"We,  the  undersigned  officials  of  the  said  church,  do 
for  ourselves  and  the  congregation  which  we  represent, 
suggest  that,  according  to  the  advice  of  Bishop  E.  B. 
Kephart,  and  for  the  saving  of  the  church  and  the  glory 
of  God,  the  case  be  withdrawn  from  the  courts  and  that 
the  entire  matter  be  adjusted  by  the  withdrawal  of  Rev. 
Dr.  Rock  from  the  pastorate  of  said  church, and  also  that 
of  Rev.  Z.  A.  Weidler  from  the  contest  for  the  pupit,and, 
forgetting  what  of  the  past  is  unpleasant  and  unprofita- 
ble to  remember,  be  henceforth  brethren,  dwelling  to- 
gether "in  the  unity  of  Spirit  and  in  the  bonds  of  peace." 

A.  S.  Light, 
Jno.  B.  Rauch, 
John  Hunsicker, 
H.  P.  Mover, 
J.  H.  Sei<tzer, 

U.   D.   SEI.TZER, 

C.  E.  Rauch. 

The  only  change  that  was  made  in  the  paper  was  this. 
It  was  agreed  that  it  should  he  said  that  Rev.  Z.  A. 
Weidler  "resigned"  instead  of  "withdrew."  At  Bishop 
Kephart's  suggestion  the  paper  was  not  formally  adopted, 
he  prefering  that  the  terms  of  the  compromise  should  be 
oral  and  all  agreed  that  nothing  should  be  published 
but  the  fact  that  a  settlement  had  been  effected.  We 
readily  acceded  to  this  suggestion  of  the  bishop  never 
dreaming  that  the  terms  of  compromise  would  ever  be 
misrepresented. 

Afte  r  this  plan  was  agreed  upon  Dr.  Rock  and  Rev. 
Weidler  were  called  in,  and  these  very  things  were  named 


35 

to  them  as  a  plan  of  compromise  and  each  was  asked  if 
he  would  agree  to  it.  Both  agreeing,  the  compromise 
was  effected  and  we  thought  the  past  gone  and  everything 
lovely.  We  did  not  in  that  compromise,  nor  do  we  now, 
intend  to  give  up  any  rights  we  hold  as  sacred,  and  under 
our  laws  and  customs,  belong  to  the  laity  of  the  United 
Brethren  church. 

When  v/e  bore  our  largely  signed  petition  to  conference 
last  fall  and  presented  it  to  the  stationing  committee, 
Bishop  Mills  asked  us  if  we  had  not  agreed  not  to  ask 
again  for  Dr.  Rock.  We  told  him  we  never  talked  of 
such  a  thing.  He  asked  Lowery,  in  our  presence,  whether 
we  had  agreed  to  such  a  thing,  and  he  said  not  in  the 
compromise,  but  that  two  of  our  brethren,  the  next  dav, 
had  said  they  would  never  ask  for  Dr.  Rock  again.  If 
they  had  said  it,  it  was  not  official,  but  each  of  them  told 
Bishop  Mi  Is,  in  Lowery's  presence,  and  in  the  presence 
of  the  rest  of  us,  that  they  had  said  no  such  thing  to 
him. 

Bishop  Hott  said  in  the  special  conference  that  he 
plead  with  us  "again  and  again"  to  arbitrate.  He  did 
not  plead  with  us  "again  and  again."  The  proposition 
was  made  to  arbitrate  and  we  agreed  on  Saturday  evening 
to  meet  him  the  following  Monday  evening  in  the  church 
and  talk  arbitration.  But  on  Sabbath  he  sent  us  a  note 
from  his  hotel,  signed  by  himself  and  Lowery,  naming  a 
plan  of  arbitration.  Then  he  took  a  train,  Sunday  af- 
ternoon, and  left  the  city,  and  has  not  returned  to 
this  day,  and  of  course  did  not  meet  with  us  on  Monday 
evenin.i,^  to  agree  on  a  plan  of  arbitration.  We  followed 
him  with  two  telegrams,  but  of  no  avail.  The  following 
•is  their  proposition  and  plan  of  arbitration,  made  only 
after  they  came  and  examined  the  deed  at  the 
Court  House,  and  after  consulting  their  lawyer. 
They  came  armed  for  war,  and,  forgetting  the  Prince  of 
Peace  whom  they  pretend  to  serve,  they  have  been  wag- 
ing a  relentless  war  upon  us  ever  since.  The  following 
is  their  proposed  plan  of  arbitration  : 


36 

I  "The  arbitrators  to  be  chosen  from  Bishops,  ex-Bis- 
hops, Presiding  Elders  and  ex-Presiding  Elders  within 
convenient  distance.  2,  The  trustees  of  Trinity  church 
to  select  one,  we  to  select  a  second  and  the  two,  the 
third.  3,  That  the  testimony  be  submitted  in  writing  or 
as  arbitrators  may  agree.  4,  That  we  agree  to  abide  by 
their  decision  according  to  our  disciplinary  regulations 
for  arbitrations .' ' 

It  will  be  noticed  that,  in  harmony  with  their  practice 
of  dictating  everything  and  allowing  us  no  voice  at  all, 
they  say,  the  arbitrators  must  be  bishops,  ex-bishops, 
presiding  elders,  and  ex-presiding  elders  of  convenient 
distance.  This  was  packing  the  committee  and  evidently 
intended  to  secure  the  verdict  before  the  hearing,  accord- 
ing to  their  favorite  star  chamber  fashion. 

We  regarded  this  a  controversy  between  the  clergy 
and  the  laity  and  would  have  readily  submitted  to  arbi- 
tration had  they  given  us  a  chance  to  choose  a  layman 
or  any  other  and  wherever  we  saw  fit.  It  must  have  been 
the  unfairness  of  their  plan  that  made  them  run  away 
and  refuse  to  meet  us  in  official  meeting  on  that  Monday 
evening .  Does  this  show  that  they  came  with  the  spirit 
of  men  bent  on  christian  arbitration  ?  when  the  first 
thing  they  did  was  to  go  to  the  court  house,  examine 
the  deed,  then  consult  a  lawyer,  before  seeing  one  of  us, 
and  afterward  refused  the  hospitality  of  our  homes  be- 
cause they  had  plenty  of  money  to  pay  their  way.  We 
do  not  know  whether  the  church  extension  funds  had 
then  been  drawn  upon  or  not.  Bishop  Hott  says  he 
plead  with  us  "again  and  again"  to  arbitrate.  Oh  yes, 
he  cared  so  little  for  Rev.  Weidler  and  was  so  determined 
not  to  permit  Dr.  Rock  to  be  our  pastor,  that  he  wanted 
to  settle  it  by  giving  us  another  man,  and  said  he  had  a 
letter  in  his  pocket  from  a  man  who  would  take  Trinity, 
and  this  was,  presumably,  his  son-in-law,  preaching  then 
and  now  for  the  Presbyterians.  No,  he  is  not  the  kind 
of  man  from  whom  we  would  buy  a  "cat  in  the  bag." 
In  that  same  Saturday  night  meeting  he  asked  about  20  of 


37 

\is,  "What  will  3-011  do  if  we  send  Weidler  here  to  worry 
you  this  whole  year  ?"  Whether  or  not  Hott  had  any- 
thing to  do  with  sending  him,  Rev.  Weidler  moved  here, 
did  not  "worry"  us  very  badly  and  did  not  preach  once 
in  our  church 

Soon  after  Bishop  Hott's  failure  to  fulfill  his  promise 
and  return  and  meet  us  in  official  meeting,  to  consider 
and  agree  upon  some  plan  of  arbitration,  we  sent  two  of 
our  brethren,  Major  H.  P.  Moyer  and  U.  D.  Seltzer,  to 
Harrisburg,to  beg  Bishop  Kephart  to  come  on  the  ground 
and  get  th*^  con  tending  parties  together  and  secure  an  ad- 
justment of  the  trouble.  He  declined,  "because  it  was  on 
Bishop  Hott's  district."  This,  with  what  follows,  will 
show  how  anxious  and  willing  we  were  to  have  it  ad- 
justed in  any  Christian  way,  And  it  could  have  been 
settled,  easily, if  any  bishop  had  come  here  in  the  father- 
ly, shepherdly  and  unpartisan  spirit  of  a  true  bishop  and 
gone  heartily  and  kindly  and  pleasantly  about  the  work. 
No  man  could  settle  it,  then  or  now,  coming  with  the  au- 
tocratic, bigoted  or  hierarchal  spirit.  This  can  be  settled 
as  the  itinerant  plan  must  be  administered  to  stand  and 
be  in  favor  with  our  people,  not  arbitrarily,  but  with 
Christian  kindness  and  regard  for  the  tastes,  wishes  and 
rights  of  preachers  and  people. 

Then  in  May,  1895,  when  the  Board  of  Bishops  recom- 
mended arbitration  without  geographical  or  personal  lim- 
itation in  the  choice  of  the  arbiters,  at  the  suggestion  of 
Dr.  Rock,  we  immediately  met  and  agreed  to  act  upon 
their  recommendation,  which  we  did  by  passing  the  fol- 
lowing resolution  and  forwarded  it  to  the  secretary  of 
the  Board  of  Bishops  : — 

"Resolved,  That  we  cheerfully  and  obediently  accept 
and  heartily  approve  the  advice  and  recommendation  of 
our  very  competent  Board  of  Bishops,  and  that  we  hold 
ourselvts  in  immediate  readiness  to  choose  our  arbiters 
and  submit  our  case  to  the  said  Court  of  Arbitration,  the 
day  that  our  brethren,  the  plaintiffs,  will  withdraw  their 
suit  from  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  and  give  us  notice 


that  they  are  ready  to  accept  and  follow  the  advice  of  the- 
Board  of  Bishops." 

Revs  l/owery,  Weidler,  et  al. ,  declined  to  arbitrate  be- 
cause we  had  before  refused  a  hidebound  arbitration  and 
they  continued  their  case  in  the  courts.  This  they  did  at 
great  cost  to  the  laity  of  the  conference  and  with  heavy 
loss  to  the  connectional  interests  of  the  church.  Besides 
losing  the  $400  we  were  in  the  habit  of  gtvir:g  each  year^ 
to  the  conference  collections,  they  gave  to  Rev.  Weidler 
^4fxD  of  church  extension  and  missionary  money  and  to 
their  attorney  and  court  expenses  ^420,  making  in  all 
I820  for  the  first  year,  while  the  special  session  of  con- 
ference cost  them  and  us  not  less  than  |6oo.  And  be- 
cause of  their  cruel  treatment  of  us  and  expanses  they 
have  forced  upon  us,  we  cannot  respond  this  year  to  the 
calls  for  the  general  work  and  the  conference  will  be 
short  at  least  $400  that  we  could  and  would  have  given 
if  they  bad  given  us  Dr.  Rock  and  permitted  us  to  live  in 
peace.  This  is,  for  the  two  years,  worse  than  the  loss  of 
|2,22o,  in  round  numbers,  and  this  would  have  made 
Boehm  church,  Reading,  a  splendid  success  or  it  would 
have  much  more  than  paid  the  debt  on  Pleasant  Hill 
church.  And  this  waste  and  destruction  of  one  of  our 
best  churches  goes  on,  while  the  church  erection  secre- 
tary goes  up  and  down  the  land  telling  our  people  that 
we  have  1,200  societies  without  churches  and  begging 
our  people  to  give  to  the  church  extension  fund,  to  build 
churches  for  these  homeless  congregations. 

Bishop  Hott  and  D.  D.  Lowery  will  doubtless  apologize, 
as  heretofore,  for  breaking  positive  and  tacit  promises 
and  refusing  to  appoint  Dr.  Rock  to  Trinity  church,  by 
referring  the  people  to  the  resolution  adopted  by  that 
conference.  That  resolution  was  not  in  the  way.  It  was 
only  a  request  to  employ  members  of  the  conference  "as 
far  as  practicable."  There  was  no  command  in  it.  Be- 
sides that  two  fields  were  left  open,  and  to  one  of  these 
the  presiding  elder  appointed, almost  immediately, a  mem- 
ber   of  another    conference.     Had    the  presiding   elder 


39 

promised  that  good  brother  employment  before  the  con- 
ference convened,  and  was  that  charge  left  unsupplied  by 
the  stationing  committee  so  that  it  would  not  appear  that 
they  had  done  for  him,  in  spite  of  the  conference  reso- 
lution, what  they  refused  to  do  for  Dr   Rock  ? 

Moreover  certain  members  of  the  conference  have 
made  a  great  deal  of  noise  about  preachers  coming  in 
from  other  conferences  and  about  Dr  Rock  coming 
east.  Is  this  a  new  thing  under  the  sun  ?  Are  not  calls, 
transfers  and  change  of  conference  relations  a  very  old 
and  a  very  common  thing  ?  The  most  of  the  men  who 
have  made  all  this  ado  came  into  this  from  other  confer- 
ences. And  on  how  many  churches,  parionages  and 
congregations  can  these  noisy  fellows  lay  their  hand  and 
truthfully  say,  "I  built  and  gathered  these  ?"  Only  one 
year  before  the  conference  refused  us  our  choice.  Memo- 
rial church,  Harrisburg,  had  asked  for  Dr.  J.  P.  Miller, 
whom  they  had  already  called,  from  Toledo,  Iowa,  and 
he  was  sent,  although  he  did  not  present  his  transfer  un- 
til a  year  later.  And  from  that  very  conference  Rev.  H. 
B.  Spayd  went  out  and  became  pastor  of  First  church, 
York.  He  was  called  more  than  seven  months  before  and 
Bishop  Kephart  and  the  rest  of  the  stationing  committee 
of  Pennsylvania  Conference,  appointed  him  to  said 
church  seven  months  before  his  year  had  expired,  without 
securing  his  consent  to  resign  and  go  there.  He  did  not 
resign  his  charge  at  Annville,  but  stayed  the  entire  year. 
The  congregation  at  York  waited  for  him  from  March 
until  October,  and  when  he  went,  East  Pennsylvania 
Conference  uttered  no  word  against  calls  or  his  going. 
They  said  nothing  then  about  the  itinerant  system  being 
imperilled.  But  going  out  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
coming  in.  See  ?  It  has  been  more  than  insinuated 
that  Dr.  Rock  was  a  place  seeker,  seeking  the  best  places. 
So  far  from  this,  the  best  places  have  sought  him,  and  he 
authorizes  us  to  challenge  any  man  to  stand  up  and  name 
the  church  he  ever  connived  to  secure.  Only  last  fall  he 
was  offered  the  best  station  and  the  best  circuit  in  a  c  m- 


40 

fereuce  not  far  west  of  Pittsburg  and  the  best-paying  sta- 
tion in  another  conference  on  this  side  the  Mississippi^ 
Is  this  his  crime  or  is  it  one  of  the  good  reasons  why  we 
wanted  him  ? 

If  one  takes  the  politician's  view  and  is  ambitious  ta 
be  a  delegate  to  general  conference,  presiding  elder,  bish- 
op, or  hold  some  other  general  office  in  the  church,  the 
wisdom  of  changing  conferences  might  be  questioned. 
But  if  he  prefers  to  be  a  pastor  and  regards  a  good  pas- 
torate preferable  to  official  feathers,  what  harm  can  there 
be  to  him  or  the  church  to  change  conferences  ?  What 
claims  has  a  preacher  an  conference  ground  that  he  does 
not  have  on  church  ground  ?  And  is  it  not  the  success 
of  the  denomination  we  seek  ?  And  if  we  specially  seek 
conference  success,  will  not  the  coming  in  of  the  stronger- 
men  more  certainly  insure  it  ?  College  takes  from  col- 
lege, and  often  with  good  effect  all  around,  and  will  not 
calls  and  the  encouragement  of  them  be  a  spur  to  minis- 
ters and  congregations  to  merit  the  best  ?  No,  it  is  jeal- 
ousy and  envy  that  sees  evil  in  calls  and  conference 
changes,  and  the  envious  clergyman  is  a  nuisance  and  a 
self-confessed  weakling.  Calls  are  often  wise  and  they 
are  essential  to  the  continuance  of  the  itinerant  system,. 
to  the  prosperity  of  the  church  and  to  the  raising  and 
preserving  of  a  high  standard  in  the  ministry.  When 
conferences  and  men  cannot  force  mediocrity  of  mind 
and  dearth  of  spirituality  and  piety  upon  intelligent  and 
religious  congregations,  then  preachers  will  seek  to  merit 
the  best  appointments. 

AN  APPEAL. 

We  have  finished  a  condensed  history  of  our  contro- 
ves)'- with  East  Penna.  Conference.  Our  appeal  is  to  the 
laity  and  to  the  large  number  of  the  clergy  who  believe 
in  fair  play  and  equal  rights. 

Dear  Brethren,  did  we  violate  any  custom  in  asking 
for  a  man  that  would  suit  us?  Were  we  not  encouraged 
to  our  course  ?    Do  petitions  to   an   annual   conference. 


41 

through  a  delegate  or  otherwise,  mean  anything  or  is  tkis 
only  a  sop  thrown  out  to  vex  us   when   we  take  it  in  ear- 
nest ?     Is  this  the  true   spirit   of  our    polity?     Is  ours  a 
reign  of  clerical  "lords  over   God's  heritage,"  or   is   it  a 
"government  of  the  people,   by   the   people   and  for  the 
people?"     Is  not  ours  a  case   of  taxation   without  repre- 
sentation ?     Would  you  furnish  all  the  money  and   per- 
mit the  presiding  elder  and  a  pastor  to  do   all   the  "boss- 
ing?"    Has  it  not  been  the  custom  of  our  conferences  to 
get  preachers    and    congregations  together  that  will   be 
pleased  with  each  other  ?     Is   not   this   wise  diplomacy  ? 
Is  it  not   the    most   unwise   and  unseemly   thing  in   the 
world  to  send  a  preacher  where  almost  an    entire  congre- 
gation do  not  want  him  and   w'!ll  not  support   him  ?     Is 
there  sense  or  statesmanship  in  it  ?      Is  it  not  success  the 
conference  seeks  and  is   not  failure  inevitable  when  the 
lelations  are  unpleasant  ?     If  a   congregation   asks   for  a 
competent  man  and  he  is  willing   to  serve  them,  would  it 
not  be  wise  to  solemnize  the  nuptials  and  let   them  work 
together  ?    Is  not  love   the   best   reason  for  matrimony  ? 
Would  it  have  done  the  conference  or  its  members   any 
harm  to  have  given  us  our  choice  ?    Would  not  the  harm 
that  has  been  done  been  avoided  ?  Would  not  more  than 
$2,200  of  money  have  been   saved  to  the  church   besides 
much  good  feeling  ?    The  most  efficient  men  will  always 
be  wanted  at  the  churches  paying   commanding  salaries, 
and  will  not  salaries  depreciate  if  their  wishes  are  denied? 
Do  not  preachers  only  close  the  doors  of  the  best  churches 
open  to  them  by  neglecting  their  own  mental  and  spirit- 
ual furnishing  ?    Will  not  preachers  much   sooner  reach 
the  best  places  by   making  themselves   w^orthy  than  by 
opposing  the  strongest  churches  in   their  choice  of  the 
strongest  men  ?    We  believe  congregations  should   seek 
such  men  through  courteous  requests  to  the  conference, 
but  the  most  efficient  men  will  always  be  sought  after  by 
the  strongest  churches  and  no  amount  of  persecution  and 
fuss  by    envious  souls    and   by  mediocrity    will    prevent 
them  from  getting  together.     If  it  docs,  then  the  doom 


42 

erf  the  church  is  written.  Intelligence  and  wealth  will 
not  seek  membership  in  a  church  where  their  choices, 
tastes  and  rights  are  ignored  and  where  the  laigest  privi- 
lege they  will  have,  in  managing  the  church,  will  be  in 
furnishing  the  money.  The  commercial  idea  runs 
all  through  the  New  Testament  and  the  kingdom  of  Jesus 
and  no  amount  of  envy  or  self-seeking  on  the  part  of 
small  men  will  prevent  the  Master  from  promoting  the 
faithful  and  successful  to  more  honorable,  responsible 
and  remunerative  places 

Have  our  circuits,  stations  and  districts  no  rights  the 
conference  and  presiding  elders  must  respect  ?  Is  it  ac- 
tually true  that  the  laity  have  no  knowledge  of  what  the}- 
need  and  no  immediate  voice  in  securing  it  ?  Since  this 
controversy  began  bishops  and  ex-bishops  and  an  editor 
have  put  forth  the  doctrine  that,  "under  our  itinerant  sys- 
tem, preachers  waive  their  right  to  choose  their  appoint- 
ment and  churches  waive  their  right  to  choose  their  pas- 
tor." This  is  misleading.  Everybody  knows  that  our 
preachers  do  not  only  say,  in  conference,  ''If  the  confer- 
ence can  give  me  such  and  such  a  field  and  convenient  to 
my  home,  I  will  take  work  from  the  conference,  other- 
wise I  will  not,"  but  preachers  have  the  right  of  appeal 
from  the  report  of  the  stationing  committee,  the  right  to 
refuse  to  go,  and  the  right  to  resign  and  refuse  to  stay, 
^or  any  reason  satisfactory  to  themselves,  and  we  never 
knew  a  preacher  to  lose  his  conference  standing  or  to  be 
punished  for  either.  Preachers  in  the  strength  of  their 
manhood  and,  who  have  something  to  say  now  about  the 
"vows"  they  took,  have  done  this  and  worse.  They  have 
abandoned  the  ministry  for  purely  secular  pursuits  and 
the  larger  salaries  they  afford.  He  can  also  hold  his  con- 
ference appointment  and  draw  his  salary  while  looking 
about  for  something  more  satisfactory  in  another  church 
and,  when  he  has  found  it,  he  can  resign  and  go  to  work 
in  another  church  and  when  his  conference  convenes  he 
can  secure  a  letter  of  honorable  dismissal  from  his  con- 
ference and  church.     So  far  from  being  punished   for  it 


43 

we  never  heard  of  one,  out  of  the  many,  that  was  even 
censured  by  his  conference.  Where  does  it  say  in  the 
discipline  that  the  churches  waive  their  rights  to  choose 
a  pastor?  What  is  the  meaning  of  lay  delegation  in  the 
annual  conference  and  of  the  right  of  petition  ?  In  a  very 
able  paper  read  by  Bishop  J.  S.  Mills,  D  D.,  before  the 
Parliament  of  Religions  at  the  World's  Fair,  and  in  a 
good  paper  from  the  pen  of  Bishop  E.  B.  Kephart,  D.  D., 
and  both  published  in  the  United  Brethren  Quarterly  Re- 
view, they  both  say,  in  speaking  of  the  American  quality 
of  our  polity,  "The  right  of  appeal  is  inviolate,"  and  we 
believe  what  they  say.  The  latter  says  the  same  thing  in 
his  Manual  on  the  Discipline.  But  some  would  have  us 
believe  that  this  right,  in  all  things,  is  for  the  preachers 
only.  Is  that  true?  If  so,  is  it  American  or  Christian?  We 
do  not  believe  the  right  of  appeal  is  inviolate  for  preach- 
ers only,  but  for  all.  If  it  is  for  preachers  only,  then  the 
discipline  should  say  so.  But  East  Pennsylvania  Confer- 
ence and  the  presiding  elder  must  hold  that  the  laity  have 
no  rights  they  must  respect,  for  they  ignored  our  peti- 
tions, they  treated  our  pleadings  with  contempt,  they 
dealt  with  us  with  severe  arbitrariness,  appealed  to  the 
arm  of  the  law  to  compel  acquiescence,  and,  as  if  gone 
mad  with  the  spirit  of  Romanism  and  the  Inquisition  and 
St.  Bartholemew's  Day,,  they  annuled  our  contract  with 
Dr.  Rock,  without  even  a  complaint  against  him,  deposed 
all  our  oflBcials  from  office  and  expell^^d  every  member  of 
our  large  congregation  from  the  church,  without  previous 
notice  of  charges  or  complaints  and  without  the  hearing 
guaranteed  to  us  by  our  book  of  discipline,  and  this  they 
did  also  in  violation  of  the  American  spirit  and  practice. 
We  appeal  to  the  reader  whether  we  have  not  been  treated 
without  feeling  or  statesmanship  or  any  sign  of  the 
christian  spirit,  but  with  arbitrary  rule  and  cold  and  un- 
yielding law,  from  the  beginning  to  the  present  status  of 
the  controversy;  and  whether  this  publication  of  the  facts 
had  not  become  a  necessity  to  the  church  and  the  cause 
of  our  Lord. 


44 

We  are  told  that  the  exclusive  control  of  the  pulpits 
must  remain  vested  in  the  stationing  committee  to  save 
and  perpetuate  the  itinerant  system.  So  far  from  this, 
others  have  the  itinerant  S3'stem  who  have  neither  pre- 
siding elders  or  bishops  and  whose  laity  always  choose 
their  pastor.  He  is  appointed,  but  with  careful  defer- 
ence to  their  wishes.  Then  who  does  not  know  that,  in 
our  own  church,  preachers  are  selected  and  often  practi- 
tically  stationed  before  the  conference  convenes.  Con- 
gregations and  preachers  make  choices  of  men  and 
fields,  and  presiding  elders  and  bishops  make  promises 
to  both  and  fulfill  them,  because  it  is  wise  to  do  so  or  be- 
cause there  would  be  trouble  if  they  did  not.  The  truth 
is  that  the  rights  of  the  preachers  must  not  he  lessened 
and  the  rights  of  the  laity  must  be  as  many  as  those  of 
the  clergy,  the  preachers  tastes  and  circumstances  must 
be  consulted,  and  the  churches  must  have  a  distinct 
voice  and  right  of  choice  in  the  selection  of  pastors,  or 
the  itinerant  system  will  come  into  utter  disrepute  and 
every  other  interest  of  the  church  will  suffer  for  want  of 
accessions  and  financial  support.  It  is  the  only  thing 
that  will  save  the  itinerant  system.  There  is  no  place 
for  arbitrary  rule  in  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  is 
not  the  spirit  of  Christianity.  The  Methodist  church 
makes  a  habit  of  transfering  preachers  from  conference 
to  conference,  from  New  York  to  San  Francisco,  and 
from  Boston  to  Denver  to  please  the  laity  u|>on  whom 
the  great  financial  burdens  of  the  church  rest.  This 
they  do  because  the  success  of  Methodism  and  Christi- 
anity require  it.  This  they  do,  too,  with  no  fear  that  it 
will  tear  down  conferences  or  deteriorate  the  ministry. 

In  less  than  six  months  after  the  conference  refused  us 
Dr.  Rock,  sent  us  Rev.  \Veidler,and,  while  he,  supported 
by  Rev.  D.  D.  L^owery,  and  others,  was  seeking  pos- 
session of  our  pulpit  through  the  courts,  a  Methodist 
bishop  made  eleven  changes  in  Philadelphia  confer- 
ence to  accommodate  the  tastes  and  necessities  of 
oae   congregation.       And    yet  we    hear    much     of    our 


45 

"most  excellent"  and  "flexible  polit}',"  of  none  or 
almost  none  of  episcopacy  in  it,  and  of  as  much  of  the 
Christian  and  more  of  the  American  spirit  as  in  that  of 
the  M.  E.  church.  Where  are  our  "flexible  polity"  and 
"flexible  usages"  if  the  last  two  appointments  of  East 
Pennsylvania  Conference  to  Trinity  church  are  in  har- 
mony with  it  ?  Its  flexibility  must  lie  in  the  liberty  of 
doing  such  lawless  things  as  we  have  named  in  the  chap- 
ter under  "Things  Unlawful." 

What  we  have  written,  we  have  written,  and  no  reply 
from  any  source  whatsoever,  shall  be  suSicient  to  pro- 
voke us  to  write  another  line.  From  necessity  and  the 
solicitations  of  many  lay  and  clerical  friends, and  that  the 
church  might  know  the  facts  in  the  case,  the  official 
board  unanimously  approves  and  sends  forth  this  pamph- 
let. This  we  resolved  to  do  in  official  meeting  assem- 
bled and  without  encouragement  from  Mr.  Rigor  or  Dr. 
Rock.  Furthermore  we  are  ready,  if  necessary,  to  estab- 
lish the  truth  of  the  facts  herein  contained  with  such  evi- 
dence as  will  be  accepted  by  any  court  in  the  land.  We 
are  not  without  hope  for  the  future.  Although  many  of 
our  churches  have  chosen  their  pastors  and  sometimes 
called  them  from  other  conferences,  the  like  of  our  trou-^ 
ble  has  probably  never  occurred  in  the  history  of  our 
church.  With  a  bishop  and  presiding  elder  with  more 
judgment  to  discern  the  situation, and  with  less  rashness, 
this  would  not  have  occurred.  Aad  thank  God,  it  will 
not  likely  occur  again  in  fifty  years,  if  ever.  The  men 
are  scarcely  born  and,  Heaven  grant  they  never  shall  be, 
who  will  venture  to  repeat  the  unseemly  and  atrocious 
thing. 

By  order  of  the  Official  Board   of  Trinity 

U.  B.  Church,  Lebanon,  Pa. 

^uly  29,  1896. 


,%•;(, 


i 
I 

m 


I 


PHOTOMOUNT 
PAMPHLET  BINDER 

PAT.    NO. 
877188 

Manufactured  by 

GAYLORD  BROS.  Inc. 

Syracuse,  N.  Y, 

Stockton,  Calif. 


BX9878.4.L44 

History  of  the  controversy  between  East 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00044  7484 


